Just curious: the article said that the moderates are doing the same thing as the progressive wing, almost with the exact same wording. But you’re focused entirely on the progressive wing that shouldn’t be doing it. Is it because you perceive the progressive wing to be more reasonable than the moderates, so they should be the ones to not make such a move?
The House is on vacation right now. It was scheduled down time through the end of August.
Pelosi is likely to gavel in the House early, on 8/23 to take up the infrastructure bill. (Democrats have been notified to be back in DC for 8/23.)
That’s when it will pass. Or start materially moving towards passage.
Various factions will use this particular interregnum to bargain for some specific future ponies. Which is a party’s congressional delegation behaving the way they have since about 1789 or so.
Timex
3808
The reason that I place this on the progressives, is that they were the first to push this idea that they wouldn’t vote for one thing if they didn’t get to vote for both.
The moderates are simply reacting to that, essentially rejecting the hostage taking tactics. They aren’t even saying they won’t vote for the reconcillation bill… they almost certainly would. They’re just saying you can’t hold them hostage with it.
Also, I’m a believer that the two bills should be able to stand on their own, since they only need Democratic support. If they can’t even get democratic support, then that means they aren’t able to get a majority of support, which puts you back in the realm of being governed by the minority.
Sure, but the Democrats could bring them back any time they want. They could pass this bill today.
And then it would go to conference committee and sit for a few weeks instead, because the Senate is on recess until the end of the month as well and without the Republican senators on the conference it’s unlikely they’d have a quorum to take that up and reconcile the House and Republican bills.
Even the earliest-starting provisions of the bipartisan infrastructure bill have specific start horizon times that are more than a month away because of the typical time spent to get the bill through the House and then final reconciliation. Those times are specific and built in and meant to provide a buffer for the passage process.
Djscman
3810
Sorry, I have nothing else to add besides that I enjoyed that reference.
Alstein
3811
Timex (and a good number of folks here) are pretty right-wing, they just oppose Trump because they know fascism is bad.
While it drives me nuts, I hope I could do the same should a left-wing Trump ever happen. It would be really tempting to get things done for once though.
None
3812
Now you can go where people are one.
Now you can go where they get things done.
Matt_W
3813
I think the chance that the big bill passes is pretty low. Manchin won’t vote for it because of its size, thus it’s likely dead. Progressive kvetching about it will continue to give him cover to vote for the smaller bill though. (HR 3684 passed the Senate with amendment, which I think means it still has to be hashed out in conference and the amended version has to pass both houses again.)
Zylon
3814
What does a “left-wing Trump” even mean? Someone who constantly retweets Food Babe and doesn’t get anything done legislatively?
Someone who is into a strong welfare state, gun control, and climate mitigation, but who isn’t so concerned about that whole democracy thing, I should imagine.
I’m not aware of anyone in the current American political landscape who actually fits that bill, mind.
Grunden
3817
I think “lies all the time” is a necessary component as well.
I’m wounded to be ignored this way.
RichVR
3819
Well… Bill C had a pretty big ego. Not big enough to count though, I would think.
ShivaX
3821
There are hints of it, but ultimately the thing you’ll run into is that none are going to be as stupid as Trump is. Which is far more dangerous. A Trump is going to get run out of the Democratic party on a rail. Which is good, but also means a “Smart Trump” knows not to go full on Trump if they’re out there.
Ultimately the secret is just not to idolize politicians. You can like them or respect them, but when it becomes idolization is where the problems start. If someone can do no wrong, then shit spirals quickly. But again, the Democratic Party is such a massive tent atm, that it’s a lot less likely to allow such a demagogue on a national level because various factions wont support them and will work against them if it looks like they’re winning.
Remember Trump never would’ve happened if people like Rubio, Cruz and Bush had consolidated their support instead of trying to win for themselves. Trump wasn’t hitting even 50% of primaries until basically everyone else was already out. If Cruz or Rubio dropped out and threw their support to the other person and then Kasich and Bush had done the same, Trump likely never gets the nomination. Instead they fought each other and all lost. Trump was only pulling like 32% in SC. Rubio and Cruz each had 22%.
I was trying to think of something clever to say. But I’ll just stick with the Biden White House seems extremely competent and experienced.
RichVR
3823
It sounds like Mayor Pete deserves some of the credit for the infrastructure bill.
To me it is perfect example why we want smart people in government, even if they don’t have a ton of experience.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/buttigieg-transportation-politics/2021/08/13/4ad67328-fb78-11eb-9c0e-97e29906a970_story.html
Matt_W
3825
Hey folks! You may not be paying much attention to California’s gubernatorial recall election, but here’s a summary:
- Last November, CA Governor Newsom evinced gross hypocrisy and attended an event indoors at a swanky Napa Valley restaurant called French Laundry while publicly urging social distancing and pandemic restrictions. This was not well-received by anyone.
- Some Republican yahoos seized upon the political fallout of the French Laundry incident to start a recall campaign against the governor. It was somewhat of a joke. Democrats outnumber Republicans by 2:1 in California.
- No credible Democrat runs against Newsom. Of the 49 candidates on the recall ballot, 9 are Democrats, but none with statewide stature. The 3 or 4 most credible candidates are Republicans, including Larry Elder who leads the polls and is an inveterate Trumpster.
- This is a recall election in an off-year when enthusiasm for politics is low. Polls of likely voters suggest Newsom currently has about 50/50 odds of surviving.
- Because of CA’s idiotic recall process, the ballot for recall contains two questions: a) Do you vote for recall? and b) Who do you vote to replace the governor if he’s recalled? If the majority of returned ballots vote yes on question a, then the candidate (of 49) who received the most votes on question b will serve out the remainder of Newsom’s term (a little over a year.)
- Diane Feinstein is 87 years old and if she dies or is incapacitated before 2024, the CA governor appoints her successor…
