Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Horse Named Stranger

US Politics: CPAC - Finding new ways to bring America to Rune.

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Fez said:

Supposedly yes, but she was doing it as a joke reference. At least that's what an aide of hers claimed.

Clearly you haven't seen much footage of Sinema before. She regularly wears odd clothing and colored wigs and the like on the senate floor. One of her long-held stances is that "business attire" is outdated at best, and sexist at worst, and that clothing should have no bearing how seriously someone is taken.

Here's some other examples of her senate floor attire

I've got no problem with it, the senate could use a bit less stuffiness. And its completely separate from her annoying votes.

 

What I do have a problem with is that the senate floor votes have stalled out for over 3 hours now. Supposedly Manchin isn't on board yet even with the new UI deal, and there's a real chance he'll vote for Portman's amendment; which extends UI only through July 18 and doesn't have the retroactive 2020 tax break.

I just became anti-Sinema. Never thought I'd see the day. Hopefully George and Steven were right after all.

It is a place of business. Dress appropriately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

He is the Waldo Frey of American politics.

It's some real WTF territory at this point. Although, it's also on Schumer for agreeing to a "deal" without apparently making sure Manchin was on board in the first place.

Of course, it's not a given that the Portman amendment could pass either; since that would require all 50 Republicans voting for it as well. And some of them are so opposed to UI even as a concept that it may be difficult to get them on board with voting for any of it, even though it's only for ratfucking purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fez said:

Supposedly yes, but she was doing it as a joke reference. At least that's what an aide of hers claimed.

Clearly you haven't seen much footage of Sinema before. She regularly wears odd clothing and colored wigs and the like on the senate floor. One of her long-held stances is that "business attire" is outdated at best, and sexist at worst, and that clothing should have no bearing how seriously someone is taken.

Here's some other examples of her senate floor attire

That just seems like terrible optics, joke or not. Just wtf?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

That just seems like terrible optics, joke or not. Just wtf?

Getting overly concerned with a woman's attire or the thumbs down? Yeah, agree, optics aren't great for either.

*Corrected

Edited by Week

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Week said:

Getting overly concerned with a woman's attire or the thumbs down? Yeah, agree, optics aren't great for either.

*Corrected

The thumbs down - idgaf what she wears

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Morpheus said:

Et tu, Jimmy Pesto

 

I saw this earlier and had to immediately rewatch the Coupon the Movie skit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

On that note, has anyone else gotten a letter that says their $600 check doesn't need to be considered when filing one's taxes?

Yeah I did.  Think, like, a month ago.

3 hours ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Is this real video of Sinema voting down the bill?

If so, does she think this was her John McCain moment or some shit?

This smells like a silly twitter outrage thing.  It looks quite possible they just couldn't hear her vote so she she did it to make it clear.

2 hours ago, Fez said:

Here's some other examples of her senate floor attire

My favorite is when she wore the "dangerous creatures" shirt Romney said "you're breaking the internet!" and she said "good."  Big fan of her fashion statements.  

2 hours ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

Here's the list of the Dems:

"Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Jon Tester of Montana, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire voted against proceeding, though the tally remains open. So did two close Biden allies, Chris Coons and Tom Carper of Delaware. Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who caucuses with the Senate Democrats, also opposed it."

Fucking Dems--this wasn't getting by the Republicans anyway, and these assholes can't even pretend to support people living in poverty. 

 

I expect many if not most of those members would (and hopefully will) vote for it when it's an isolated bill.  It's a procedural vote, they're objecting to adding it to the bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Morpheus said:

Et tu, Jimmy Pesto

 

Sam Seder had Andy Kindler on The Majority Report today and they talked a bit about it. They're both on Bobs Burgers  (Hugo and Mort respectively) and both knew the guy personally from back when he was working with David Cross on Mr. Show.

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I expect many if not most of those members would (and hopefully will) vote for it when it's an isolated bill.  It's a procedural vote, they're objecting to adding it to the bill.

Voting against shit like this on procedural grounds is absolute horse shit. By voting against it, all those people who aren't Sinema and Manchin made it look like a weaker proposal with less support that it actually has. They have given every opponent of the proposal a foothold to say "Not even 50 Democrats support this so therefore it is bad". Republicans don't even need to attack Democratic policies, Democrats do their work for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Idk, maybe I need to apologize to Manchin (& Sinema), thinking they/ he were power-dunk or just didn't want Dems to keep the house and the senate by opposing such popular thing... Maybe it IS as simple as that: They are not the only ones.

A propos of nothing...

 

Edited by Mindwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Idk, maybe I need to apologize to Manchin (& Sinema), thinking they/ he were power-dunk or just didn't want Dems to keep the house and the senate by opposing such popular thing... Maybe it IS as simple as that: They are not the only ones.

A propos of nothing...

 

I'd say that it is more likely that they're running interference by defusing the blame on Biden and Harris for not moving more aggressive with overruling the parliamentarian. I firmly believe that when push comes to shove, all of them would have voted for the relief bill if it was still in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

By voting against it, all those people who aren't Sinema and Manchin made it look like a weaker proposal with less support that it actually has. They have given every opponent of the proposal a foothold to say "Not even 50 Democrats support this so therefore it is bad". Republicans don't even need to attack Democratic policies, Democrats do their work for them.

No, they're saying they don't want to tank the bill and overrule the parliamentarian in the process to add the minimum wage - which is exactly what I told you would happen.  As I intimated, hopefully Schumer does bring it to a vote as a standalone bill to demonstrate all Republicans oppose it.  And Manchin too, he's made that clear, so he should own it.  Sinema's objections have always been it shouldn't be added to reconciliation (making this vote entirely consistent), not that she actually opposed the policy, so her vote will be interesting if done through regular order.

The only one I'd be worried about is Hassan since she's running for reelection - in a race that could be very very tough if Sununu runs.  The minimum wage is very popular overall, but my prior is it may not be in New Hampshire - it is a pretty funky state.  If so I might be reticent to force to take a tough vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

R.I.P. (but funny)

 


***

 

https://www.democracydocket.com/2021/03/120-gop-house-members-share-incendiary-social-media-content-leading-up-to-capitol-attack/

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA-19) published a review of her colleague’s social media histories, creating a permanent record of any tweets or posts that may have encouraged or aided in the January 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. All 120 Members of Congress across 33 states featured in the report voted to overturn the 2020 election results.

The review includes social media posts from Election Day to the end of January “related to the violence on January 6, 2021 and claims regarding the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election,” as well as other relevant contributions to the culture of misinformation and violent rhetoric that led to the siege on the Capitol. 

 

 

Edited by Mindwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

I'd say that it is more likely that they're running interference by defusing the blame on Biden and Harris for not moving more aggressive with overruling the parliamentarian. I firmly believe that when push comes to shove, all of them would have voted for the relief bill if it was still in there.

I'd believe that of Carper and Coons, they're both really close with Biden personally, so if he asked them to vote against it as some sort of cover I think they'd be happy to do so.

The others though are basically a usual suspects list of moderate Democrats, and it's easy to imagine any of them simply deciding that voting yes on it is bad politics in their state. Not sure why, considering how popular it polls. But maybe they think of it as something like gun control, which polls well, but doesn't move the needle on supporters and the people opposed are really opposed.

 

By the way, Kristen Sinema's net worth is somewhere between -$20,000 and +$85,000; she doesn't fit the profile that this is some sort of conspiracy of rich senators. She still has student loans (somewhere between $15,000 and $50,000; having two masters, a JD, and a PhD can get expensive), and her only declared assets are a 401k and a retirement benefit from her time in the Arizona state legislature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fez said:

By the way, Kristen Sinema's net worth is somewhere between -$20,000 and +$85,000; she doesn't fit the profile that this is some sort of conspiracy of rich senators. She still has student loans (somewhere between $15,000 and $50,000; having two masters, a JD, and a PhD can get expensive), and her only declared assets are a 401k and a retirement benefit from her time in the Arizona state legislature.

This woman was an archetypal crusty communist Green party Nader supporter, how did she end up being so shit? Sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Fez said:

I'd believe that of Carper and Coons, they're both really close with Biden personally, so if he asked them to vote against it as some sort of cover I think they'd be happy to do so.

The others though are basically a usual suspects list of moderate Democrats, and it's easy to imagine any of them simply deciding that voting yes on it is bad politics in their state. Not sure why, considering how popular it polls. But maybe they think of it as something like gun control, which polls well, but doesn't move the needle on supporters and the people opposed are really opposed.

 

By the way, Kristen Sinema's net worth is somewhere between -$20,000 and +$85,000; she doesn't fit the profile that this is some sort of conspiracy of rich senators. She still has student loans (somewhere between $15,000 and $50,000; having two masters, a JD, and a PhD can get expensive), and her only declared assets are a 401k and a retirement benefit from her time in the Arizona state legislature.

I didn't post it because 'conspiracy'. More because it's so absurd that rich people (and of the Senate, everyone seems to be filthy rich, with exceptions like Sinema) make decisions about other people's minimum wage, much less decide not to raise it. Sorry for weird sentence, I'm tired.

Much, much less people who have firms with employees at minimum wage, like Manchin.

 

Edited by Mindwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

This woman was an archetypal crusty communist Green party Nader supporter, how did she end up being so shit? Sad.

Hard to know. Prior to Nov. 2020, one could argue that she was doing what she thought was necessary to win in Arizona. But then Kelly won there too, against the exact same opponent, by a wider margin while running to her left. You'd think that would be a wake up call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DMC said:

Yeah I did.  Think, like, a month ago.

This smells like a silly twitter outrage thing.  It looks quite possible they just couldn't hear her vote so she she did it to make it clear.

My favorite is when she wore the "dangerous creatures" shirt Romney said "you're breaking the internet!" and she said "good."  Big fan of her fashion statements.  

I expect many if not most of those members would (and hopefully will) vote for it when it's an isolated bill.  It's a procedural vote, they're objecting to adding it to the bill.

I just don't think most people will understand that. It's already being spun as they don't care about workers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

I just don't think most people will understand that. It's already being spun as they don't care about workers. 

I agree, which is why politically I think it's incumbent on Schumer to bring a standalone bill to the floor.  It also should be noted that some of the nay votes like Shaheen have minor concerns about Sanders' proposal that could easily be negotiated if gone through regular order.

10 minutes ago, Fez said:

Hard to know. Prior to Nov. 2020, one could argue that she was doing what she thought was necessary to win in Arizona. But then Kelly won there too, against the exact same opponent, by a wider margin while running to her left. You'd think that would be a wake up call.

Yeah I don't think this is an electoral concern.  Too lazy to look it up, but I did see a poll that showed the wage hike is quite popular in Arizona last week.  Sinema's been very clear she didn't think it should go through reconciliation.  It seems like she's just genuinely a Senate institutionalist.  :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...