U.S. Politics: End Testing, Make Schools Safe Again!

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, DMC said:

That's not how politics works.  You don't have to pass something to make an offer.  They publicized an offer on Monday, and thus the Dems publicly responded to it.  The Dems would be idiots not to respond to it.  Now, should some of that response be pointing out they can't even pass the offer they put in the chamber they control?  Yes, definitely!  But acting like you should just wait until your opposition passes the offer they publicize before you respond not only contradicts how things have always been done in the history of modern politics, it's also incredibly stupid politically as it makes you look like you're the one sitting on your hands.

I saw one in one of your posts to @GrimTuesday you said you haven't seen/read much about the Democratic response wrt to the Senate proposal, so that may be where some of the disconnect is, and I think the bolded portion of this post kind of encapsulates the anxiety I'm feeling about the Democratic messaging to the Republican proposal thus far, namely that I haven't personally seen that kind of messaging coming out of the House yet (not saying that it's nonexistent, just that I haven't personally seen that messaging).

I absolutely agree that a deal must get passed; we simply can't wait until after the election to get a stimulus bill passed, and I think now is realistically the only time to get one passed, because appropriations deadlines are also coming due. But I do wish Democrats had taken a day or two to refine messaging, say they're still examining the bill, etc., and using that to collectively message about Republican dysfunction with their proposal.

On the flip side, Pelosi and other Dems have been pretty consistent about reminding everyone that Republicans decided to wait two months to even propose anything, so I don't think all of the messaging has been terrible.

And a lot of it is just anxiety about Dems caving on the liability protections. I feel pretty confident Dems and Republicans will split the baby on the plus-up at $400, which I would accept as a compromise, but the liability protection stuff is really fucking scary, especially the carrot/stick approach to school openings. I know a lot of districts here will probably move from remote learning options to full-time in school just to get a taste of that stimulus.

[Kalbear]

Gods we live in the stupidest timeline

 

 

[S John]

32 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I don't know if you've been reading the US Politics threads all along, but a couple of months ago I said I was expecting to hear that some fundie preacher was going to start saying that God had sent the plague down on America because America had elected a sinner, fornicator, liar and cheat as President.

Sadly, it has not yet happened.

I tend to pop in and out so I did not see that. The reason that hasn’t happened yet comes down to abortion.  Abortion is still such a powerful wedge issue in the US. For many, many, many Christian voters it is the be all, end all issue.  Christian voters will start with the premise that Trump will appoint pro-life judges, which he has done, and appointing pro-life judges = doing God’s work. It’s as simple as that.

Everything else, every pathetic half-assed excuse they’ll make for him, or any republican for that matter, comes down to that one single thing. The country could literally be in ashes, and it’ll still be difficult to find a well known fundamentalist leader who is going to speak out against Trump when Trump’s defeat means judges who will defend Roe v. Wade.

Were it not for abortion I think there’d be a more even ideological split amongst evangelicals and socially conservative Catholics since the Dems tend to favor helping the poor, ensuring heath care, etc. But social conservatives have done a magnificent job of using the abortion issue to blind a massive chunk of voters to anything else. For the conservative Christian, all the other right-wing policies are just barnacles stuck to the bottom of the pro-life hull. They’ll go along with those policies and find ways to justify them, just as long as they can rely on pro-life being a part of the platform.
 

28 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

At the same time, if this year has been instructional on anything at all it's that things can completely change in a couple months time.  Can't shake the feeling that something will happen to totally demolish whatever electoral prospects of a Trump loss are out there now.

Oh yea. I feel like there’s no way Biden’s current numbers will hold til November, though I’m hopeful that they will.  Even without any further surprises I think most conservatives dissatisfied with Trump will ultimately return to the fold and vote for him. Just hoping the current lead is enough of a cushion to hang on for the W.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Gods we live in the stupidest timeline

 

 

I think we somehow shifted continuities from Earth-616 to Earth-666.

[DMC]

17 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

What is just really fucking amazing to me (not in like a pissed off way or anything - just that it's weird) is how fucking old Democratic leadership is, especially in the House

Yeah, like I indicated, the Ancient Trio running the Dem House Caucus basically since Gephardt stepped down to run for president in 2004 is a fairly unprecedented long tenure outside of Sam Rayburn.

5 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I saw one in one of your posts to @GrimTuesday you said you haven't seen/read much about the Democratic response wrt to the Senate proposal

I agree with pretty much everything you said in this post, think we've reached an understanding.  I hope you're right that they split the difference on the unemployment benefits and end up at $400.  Said that yesterday.  We'll see.

[GrimTuesday]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Would you stop writing things that make me shake my head?

You don't need a 20 point plan. Frankly, I would not read it, at least not right away. I'd get around to it at some point though, if it meant something to you. 

I literally asked you how you fill in B when going from A to C. If you can't do that, it's time to go back to the drawing board. 

Not sure which A to B to C you're talking about here so I'll try and address both the ones I think it might be.

I mean, we kind of have two choices here, electoralism or violent revolution where we all die horribly, personally I pick the former. We need to build up an infrastructure of left wing groups that focus on recruiting and electing left wing officials both in terms of organization and fundraising. There also needs to be a concerted effort to develop and recruit left wing judges similar to how the Federalist society does for right wing judges. There is no shortcut here, we are still in the early days of building a left wing movement here in the US, but we have to be dogged in driving the conversation to include our goals because that helps remove the stigma associated with them due to decades of right wing programming.

As for the immediate situation at hand, the simplest way to extract concessions is to hold the liability protections hostage. That is the main thing that Republicans care about right now since a while bunch of their corporate pals are going to be facing a shit load of lawsuits because they didn't appropriately protect their workers. This is not something that the Republicans can weaponize into a backlash, this is a clear instance of profit over people and even a lot of republicans have an issue with that, so it is easier for the Democrats to say that Republicans are the unreasonable ones since they are clearly watching out for big business. I hate that we are even talking about letting the pass liability protections, but they are not going to let it go through without them, because they know that we want to ensure people can still survive.

Hope that answers some of you questions

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yeah, like I indicated, the Ancient Trio running the Dem House Caucus basically since Gephardt stepped down to run for president in 2004 is a fairly unprecedented long tenure outside of Sam Rayburn.

I agree with pretty much everything you said in this post, think we've reached an understanding.  I hope you're right that they split the difference on the unemployment benefits and end up at $400.  Said that yesterday.  We'll see.

I don't know that 400 is enough to offset the liability protections. That is a massive deal and if we're doing a deal for that, it has to be 600. If different for the liability stuff a compromise at 400 would be acceptable, but that is just too big to let slip.

[Fez]

Louie Gohmert, one of the last House holdouts who refuses to wear a mask, has tested positive for COVID-19. He spent some time around Barr yesterday when both were unmasked, and Barr is apparently getting tested today.

Gohmert has been around a ton of House members also, mostly Republicans, who will likely all need testing as well.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, S John said:

I tend to pop in and out so I did not see that. The reason that hasn’t happened yet comes down to abortion.  Abortion is still such a powerful wedge issue in the US. For many, many, many Christian voters it is the be all, end all issue.  Christian voters will start with the premise that Trump will appoint pro-life judges, which he has done, and appointing pro-life judges = doing God’s work. It’s as simple as that.

Everything else, every pathetic half-assed excuse they’ll make for him, or any republican for that matter, comes down to that one single thing. The country could literally be in ashes, and it’ll still be difficult to find a well known fundamentalist leader who is going to speak out against Trump when Trump’s defeat means judges who will defend Roe v. Wade.

Were it not for abortion I think there’d be a more even ideological split amongst evangelicals and socially conservative Catholics since the Dems tend to favor helping the poor, ensuring heath care, etc. But social conservatives have done a magnificent job of using the abortion issue to blind a massive chunk of voters to anything else. For the conservative Christian, all the other right-wing policies are just barnacles stuck to the bottom of the pro-life hull. They’ll go along with those policies and find ways to justify them, just as long as they can rely on pro-life being a part of the platform.

Being from a conservative state, and reared in a conservative, religious family, I say this is a good read on the issue, while also adding gay marriage/rights as a secondary rationale.

Looking back as I often have, conservative Christians in the U.S. will contort any other policy proposed by Republicans, often no matter how awful (except immigration and justice for Black Americans may be a growing wedge issue Democrats can exploit) to be palatable to a conservative Christian worldview simply because of the basic reasoning that Democrats want to kill all babies, and Republicans want to save them.

I honestly believe that if abortion could magically be taken off the table as a political issue (never going to happen, but hypothetically), and Republicans retained all of their other ideologies about governing, within 10-15 years, Republicans would be extinct. That's how big an issue abortion is for conservative Christians.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

16 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Gods we live in the stupidest timeline

 

 

You're a bit late on the alien DNA tip. We should all take some though. Then things would really get fun.

None for Fez though.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, Fez said:

Louie Gohmert, one of the last House holdouts who refuses to wear a mask, has tested positive for COVID-19. He spent some time around Barr yesterday when both were unmasked, and Barr is apparently getting tested today.

Gohmert has been around a ton of House members also, mostly Republicans, who will likely all need testing as well.

I immediately apologize for joking at your expense.

Please, God, are you there?

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Fez said:

Louie Gohmert, one of the last House holdouts who refuses to wear a mask, has tested positive for COVID-19. He spent some time around Barr yesterday when both were unmasked, and Barr is apparently getting tested today.

Gohmert has been around a ton of House members also, mostly Republicans, who will likely all need testing as well.

Wasn't he the one who said he'd only wear a mask if he caught COVID?

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

I don't know that 400 is enough to offset the liability protections. That is a massive deal and if we're doing a deal for that, it has to be 600. If different for the liability stuff a compromise at 400 would be acceptable, but that is just too big to let slip.

Eh, speaking as someone who is unemployed, I'd be fine with a $400 a week boost rather than $600 a week boost in unemployment benefits - if I could actually receive unemployment benefits.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You're a bit late on the alien DNA tip. We should all take some though. Then things would really get fun.

None for Fez though.

I'm just wanting to get in on that sex with witches/demons action.

Succubi, take me away!!

[Maithanet]

7 minutes ago, DMC said:

I agree with pretty much everything you said in this post, think we've reached an understanding.  I hope you're right that they split the difference on the unemployment benefits and end up at $400.  Said that yesterday.  We'll see.

I think that $400 would be fine personally.  The conservative boogeyman of "people will not look for a job if they get paid more not to work" is an actual thing in this case.  My brother-in-law in Delaware works at a tire shop and he said they can't hire anybody because the weekly rate is about $500 and nobody is interested (note: $2,000 a month goes a LOT further in Delaware than most places).  I'm sure in an ideal world, pay would increase for the tire shop guys, but that is a small, independent tire shop, and they aren't exactly in a financial position to give out a bunch of raises.  At the moment, they're just giving lots of hours to the couple of guys who are still around.  

The government needs to do a lot of things to help people and UI is just one of them.  Going from $600 to $400 isn't that big a deal IF (and only if) other support is there to fill in the gaps.  

[Guest]

Just now, DMC said:

Eh, speaking as someone who is unemployed, I'd be fine with a $400 a week boost rather than $600 a week boost in unemployment benefits - if I could actually receive unemployment benefits.

Dude, you're not even receive unemployment? Or am I reading that wrong?

[DMC]

1 minute ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Dude, you're not even receive unemployment? Or am I reading that wrong?

You are not reading that wrong.  To be fair, I only applied a couple weeks ago.  I expected not to be "working" over the summer even before covid as I finished my diss.  And then, I had hoped to find a teaching job up in the fall.  Wasn't til a couple weeks ago I gave up and acknowledged my situation.  I don't like asking the government for money.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Maithanet said:

I think that $400 would be fine personally.  The conservative boogeyman of "people will not look for a job if they get paid more not to work" is an actual thing in this case.  My brother-in-law in Delaware works at a tire shop and he said they can't hire anybody because the weekly rate is about $500 and nobody is interested (note: $2,000 a month goes a LOT further in Delaware than most places).  I'm sure in an ideal world, pay would increase for the tire shop guys, but that is a small, independent tire shop, and they aren't exactly in a financial position to give out a bunch of raises.  At the moment, they're just giving lots of hours to the couple of guys who are still around.  

The government needs to do a lot of things to help people and UI is just one of them.  Going from $600 to $400 isn't that big a deal IF (and only if) other support is there to fill in the gaps.  

I'm fuzzy on the actual debate around the CARES Act; was it decided to use the unemployment system with the plus-up instead of subsidizing existing workers' pay, like in Europe for example, because it was considered too difficult to implement?

[Fez]

18 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Wasn't he the one who said he'd only wear a mask if he caught COVID?

Yes. Yes he is. 

He has a long list of statements and actions that strongly suggest that he is the dumbest representative in the entire House. And there's some stiff competition for that title.

ETA: Exhibit 958

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I'm just wanting to get in on that sex with witches/demons action.

Succubi, take me away!!

Well, as someone who is a former camp counselor and also was a part time teacher, working with 7th graders, and with the additional background in psychology.....

6 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Wasn't he the one who said he'd only wear a mask if he caught COVID?

Now listen TGU, if you have it, don't spread it, and you need to use protection even if you think you're clean and okay.

Did you hear what happened to Billy? 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Well, as someone who is a former camp counselor and also was a part time teacher, working with 7th graders, and with the additional background in psychology.....

Now listen TGU, if you have it, don't spread it, and you need to use protection even if you think you're clean and okay.

Did you hear what happened to Billy? 

I said succubus, not incubus; begone!