US Politics: The Republicans problem with small packages

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

57 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

And nearly didn't get the Senate and even with control of the Presidency, and the congress, still can't pass a lot of what he wants. Where's all the Republican support? It was an empty victory. So keep courting the right and hope next year they can pass one more set of things on the next reconcilation? Hope it's not too watered down because we're relying on the right? Relying on a flip flop of votes from Manchins and Collins on a watered down version of what people need. 20 million unemployed. Dozens of millions facing or on the verge of unemployment. People with jobs suffering in the worst economy in our life times. Healthcare costs causing us to go bankrupt. But, hey, look at the scoreboard. Good guys won, right?

Would you prefer a second Trump term? Biden's been President for two and a half weeks and he's signing EO's at a record pace that are all for the most part really good. Meanwhile, Pelosi has passed a reconciliation bill in the House. All while qualified people are being employed at every level of government. So who cares if Biden courted some Republicans who were lost in the wilderness? Did it help him win? Yes. Has it influenced his policies or the people he's putting around him? Nah, not really, like at all. 

[Martell Spy]

1 hour ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

And nearly didn't get the Senate and even with control of the Presidency, and the congress, still can't pass a lot of what he wants. Where's all the Republican support? It was an empty victory. So keep courting the right and hope next year they can pass one more set of things on the next reconcilation? Hope it's not too watered down because we're relying on the right? Relying on a flip flop of votes from Manchins and Collins on a watered down version of what people need. 20 million unemployed. Dozens of millions facing or on the verge of unemployment. People with jobs suffering in the worst economy in our life times. Healthcare costs causing us to go bankrupt. But, hey, look at the scoreboard. Good guys won, right?

It's not that the "good guys" won. Nothing progressive could happen in this country as long as Trump was in there. And Trump was trying very hard to end our democracy. Let's not pretend this was a normal election. 

[Week]

1 hour ago, Mindwalker said:

 

Pretty lame move considering that One Fresh Pillow already exists ... generally like Hogg -- though I don't follow him closely -- I hope he doesn't fall into the pool of grifters on the left.

 

[Centrist Simon Steele]

49 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Would you prefer a second Trump term? Biden's been President for two and a half weeks and he's signing EO's at a record pace that are all for the most part really good. Meanwhile, Pelosi has passed a reconciliation bill in the House. All while qualified people are being employed at every level of government. So who cares if Biden courted some Republicans who were lost in the wilderness? Did it help him win? Yes. Has it influenced his policies or the people he's putting around him? Nah, not really, like at all. 

You are the one conflating criticisms of Democratic leadership as an alternative to Trump winning. 

36 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

It's not that the "good guys" won. Nothing progressive could happen in this country as long as Trump was in there. And Trump was trying very hard to end our democracy. Let's not pretend this was a normal election. 

But that isn't what I meant--the good guys won, the score board--it's all binary suggesting we are done. This country is still broken and it's still run by the same leadership that served in office and allowed it to be broken. Trump is gone, yes, and we passed that. But the work is only just starting if we want to not let that happen again. Defending Pelosi as a good leader because "Trump" means we could begin to see the slide back to the possible end of democracy in two years. We've gone over the edge--we need to do a lot differently to not tip all the way over.

[Morpheus]

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

She's a bad liar. Note that she said in her speech that "9/11 happened." She never once addressed if she still thought it was a false flag attack. 

“I “believe” in 9/11 and school shootings” is the kind of thing that gets standing ‘os from Republicans these days if reports about that party meeting are true.

[Mindwalker]

I was being sarcastic about her contritement!!

 

[Morpheus]

2 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

I was being sarcastic about her contritement!!

I understood, I was just adding to how she is still a piece of shit.

As for Mace, I recall someone here saying that she was a “moderate”, yet everytime she speaks she reveals herself to be the same breed of scum sucking bottom feeder as pretty much everyone else in her party.

[SFDanny]

2 hours ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

But that isn't what I meant--the good guys won, the score board--it's all binary suggesting we are done. This country is still broken and it's still run by the same leadership that served in office and allowed it to be broken. Trump is gone, yes, and we passed that. But the work is only just starting if we want to not let that happen again. Defending Pelosi as a good leader because "Trump" means we could begin to see the slide back to the possible end of democracy in two years. We've gone over the edge--we need to do a lot differently to not tip all the way over.

You're right. The good guys did win. If we define "good guys" as everyone who stood up against fascism. But @Centrist Simon Steele, who the "good guys" are changes from struggle to struggle. If we are only talking about elected Democrats - a much too narrow a group to my tastes - then we will see a lot of eyes turn to those on the center of the Democratic Party and what they will do on questions that maintain a policy consensus of the Biden/Harris agenda. Will Schumer be able to keep his fifty votes together in fixing the most critical parts of what is broken? Will Pelosi? Unless they can then the danger will increase, and 2022 could be a disaster. But it isn't just about them, or about Biden and Harris. The real question is how can the people of this country defend democracy and end the danger of fascism for the foreseeable future? How do we ensure that everything that can be done to safeguard our people from this virus be done against the background of growing anti-vaxxers, and growing antagonisms against basic public heath measures? How do we continue to force real progress against the Climate Crisis? How do we ensure the hugely important movement for equality and against systemic racism demands for change actually become enshrined in law? And that's just a start. 

None of this is done. And I don't know anyone who is saying that it is, or that we can just forget about the struggles ahead because Democrats now hold the Presidency, the House, and the Senate. The only thing we can say is an important start has been made, and much, much more work is needed. But it is only two weeks plus since the inauguration. No one realistically thought we would be very far along in the fight as of now. Right now, the Covid Relief package is number one on the agenda, followed closely by holding those accountable for the January 6th coup attempt. Let's focus on that.

As to whether or not Pelosi is a "good leader" or not, we shall see with her ability to hold the Democratic caucus together. That is her main job right now, and I'm confident she is up to the task. I'm not as sure about Schumer. He has a tougher task.

 

[Mindwalker]

Just for fun:

 

Also funny, kinda:

 

[ThinkerX]

saw a brief blurb earlier about Trump diverting leftover campaign money to his businesses...along with a note about the $400 million tab he's staring at.  

Got me to thinking.  Mention has been made of Trump starting his own political party or media network - but those sorts of things take money.  Given his financial woes, would Trump be able to come up with enough loot for either option on his own?  Also, given Trumps looming debt, would any sane financial institution loan significant cash to him?

Then there's the biggie: suppose Trump does default on that $400 million tab.  What, exactly, does he lose?  Mar A Lago? Trump Tower?  

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

39 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

saw a brief blurb earlier about Trump diverting leftover campaign money to his businesses...along with a note about the $400 million tab he's staring at.  

Got me to thinking.  Mention has been made of Trump starting his own political party or media network - but those sorts of things take money.  Given his financial woes, would Trump be able to come up with enough loot for either option on his own?  Also, given Trumps looming debt, would any sane financial institution loan significant cash to him?

Then there's the biggie: suppose Trump does default on that $400 million tab.  What, exactly, does he lose?  Mar A Lago? Trump Tower?  

 

Doesn't Trump Tower have a Foreclosure sign pending over it? Thought Deutsche Bank tentatively toyed with the idea to at least get some of its money back and ridding itself from its most toxic asset (from a PR perspective). Anyway, it'd be most certainly interesting (from an entertainment point of vieew) how many of his toys are actually his, and not just have his name on it.

[all swedes are racist]

1 hour ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Doesn't Trump Tower have a Foreclosure sign pending over it? Thought Deutsche Bank tentatively toyed with the idea to at least get some of its money back and ridding itself from its most toxic asset (from a PR perspective). Anyway, it'd be most certainly interesting (from an entertainment point of vieew) how many of his toys are actually his, and not just have his name on it.

ahahah

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

20 hours ago, Morpheus said:

“I “believe” in 9/11 and school shootings” is the kind of thing that gets standing ‘os from Republicans these days if reports about that party meeting are true.

Matt Gaetz said he needed a cig after her private speech. Let all of that sink in.

[Jaxom 1974]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Matt Gaetz said he needed a cig after her private speech. Let all of that sink in.

I'm convinced Matt Gaetz thinks he has a shot at getting into her pants...whether Nestor approves or not...

[Week]

36 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

I'm convinced Matt Gaetz thinks he has a shot at getting into her pants...whether Nestor approves or not...

He's just a creepy, misogynist bro. Wasn't he also creeping on Tiffany at one point? 

(Quick google says yes)

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/11/matt-gaetz-tiffany-trump-fire-emoji

[Mindwalker]

He also said he'd gladly give up his seat and even his house to defend the former president at the impeachment...

[Ormond]

15 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

saw a brief blurb earlier about Trump diverting leftover campaign money to his businesses...along with a note about the $400 million tab he's staring at.  

Got me to thinking.  Mention has been made of Trump starting his own political party or media network - but those sorts of things take money.  Given his financial woes, would Trump be able to come up with enough loot for either option on his own?  Also, given Trumps looming debt, would any sane financial institution loan significant cash to him?

Then there's the biggie: suppose Trump does default on that $400 million tab.  What, exactly, does he lose?  Mar A Lago? Trump Tower?  

 

My guess is that it would actually take less money to start a political party than a media network, and that he would be way more successful getting people to contribute to a new party than to a network. He just has to use the list of donors he's already had for his past campaigns to send out a fund-raising appeal for a new party, and most of those people are definitely not bankers or investors who might be expecting a return on their money.  And if he does go bankrupt or default, he can spin that to those political followers as persecution by Wall Street and the media. 

[williamjm]

15 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

saw a brief blurb earlier about Trump diverting leftover campaign money to his businesses...along with a note about the $400 million tab he's staring at.  

Got me to thinking.  Mention has been made of Trump starting his own political party or media network - but those sorts of things take money.  Given his financial woes, would Trump be able to come up with enough loot for either option on his own?  Also, given Trumps looming debt, would any sane financial institution loan significant cash to him?

I think it's safe to assume he would never have any intention of paying for those things with his own money.

[Zorral]

Had an interesting convo with an old friend.  During the campaign he experienced a rift with one of his very old, dear Black friends, over Biden.  My friend is a heavy duty socialist of the old school Minnesota Mesabi Iron Range, and was deeply anti-Biden, whereas his Black friend was all in for Biden.  They have since rapproached, I'm happy to say, not least because Biden (and Harris) have so agreeably surprised my friend.  He's now all in with Biden too.

Considering our own responses here at home, and those of others we know, Biden's hit a whole lot of voters that way.  His approach, of never taking the bait, of working hard, of thinking things through, the people he's appointing, and remaining unflappable, and what we do get to see of him, his family, and other lighter, 'non-political' moments, have won a whole lot support.  Not to mention, bringing a lot of us some very needed relief from the toxic, contagious madness spewing 24/7 into our national life for so long.

 

[Fez]

12 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Considering our own responses here at home, and those of others we know, Biden's hit a whole lot of voters that way.  His approach, of never taking the bait, of working hard, of thinking things through, the people he's appointing, and remaining unflappable, and what we do get to see of him, his family, and other lighter, 'non-political' moments, have won a whole lot support.  Not to mention, bringing a lot of us some very needed relief from the toxic, contagious madness spewing 24/7 into our national life for so long.

Because Delaware is so small, and because Obama was so much more important than Biden in '08 and '12, I think a lot of people before last year never quite realized that Biden is both a really good politician and quite likeable. And then, the campaign last year so much more about Trump and about COVID, that Biden remained an overshadowed cipher for many. The past few weeks is the first time that the national news is really about him (and his family, who are also important for getting over the Trump family), and people get to see how he actually governs and conducts himself. 

There's an awful lot of work that needs to get done, and I don't know if Biden and Congressional Democrats are going to be able to do all of it. But just having a capable, decent person as President again is a really good start.