US Politics: Don't Manchin the war...

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 minute ago, A True Kaniggit said:

So……. Your plan is you didn’t have a plan?

 

1 minute ago, larrytheimp said:

What evidence of this could you possibly have?

She only spoke out after he did. I doubt she would have if Manchin didn't. If I'm wrong, well, then you have to deal with her to get something passed and afterwards you support the best candidate who is going to primary her ass, which seems inevitable now and I wish whoever that is well because fuck Senator Sinema. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

17 minutes ago, DMC said:

How do you not get it when I've quoted Jayapal specifically explaining it?

Because she's been speaking out of both sides of her mouth until very recently. Now she's on board, but at this point last week she was very much not. You cannot pretend two months of talking points go away in a week. 

Quote

Nope, I specifically said the deadline was entirely arbitrary and maintaining leverage by demanding the two bills be passed together was perfectly reasonable.  Moreover, do you think Manchin would have even released that document with Schumer on Thursday if the progressives hadn't held the line?  He was dragging his feet and insisting on a "pause" beforehand.

LOL. Go reread what you wrote before. You keep moving the goalposts. 

Quote

And LOL at the moderates being always being "ok" with delaying the bill.  Another thing you don't understand.

Have the House moderates been a problem after multiple delays? They keep saying they want to pass the bill, but they're not making threats. They're being team players. 

I still find it funny how you said progressives should not at all given in to a 20% cut, when I thought that was a light one. Now they're probably going to have to accept less than half. Just accept you got this wrong and keep things moving.

[Larry of the Lawn]

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

 

She only spoke out after he did. I doubt she would have if Manchin didn't. If I'm wrong, well, then you have to deal with her to get something passed and afterwards you support the best candidate who is going to primary her ass, which seems inevitable now and I wish whoever that is well because fuck Senator Sinema. 

Source?  She's been harping on austerity and what qualifies for reconciliation and what doesn't since this winter.  She's been quoted as early as June saying she didn't like the price tag on this one.  But your position is, that if Manchin hadn't had any issues with it, shed just go along with it?  

eta:

she also left DC yesterday for a doctor's appt aka "go to meet with a PAC."  there's plenty of evidence that she'd be doing this regardless of Manchin 

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Because she's been speaking out of both sides of her mouth until very recently. now she's on board, but at this point last week she was very much not. You cannot pretend two months of talking points go away in a week. 

Lol, it's almost like she's been negotiating.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

37 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yes, thanks for proving my point.  You still don't understand that's a negotiating position.  And apparently you forgot all your apocalyptic talk about the breaking of the Democrats if the progressives insisted on delaying the BIF vote and demanding the two bills be passed together.  Instead, they succeeded and Joe Biden agreed with them.

I think what's interesting in the progressive vs "moderate" dynamic here is that truly all the progressives have done is asked for both bills to pass at the same time. They have never threatened to tank the bipartisan bill for crazy reasons like, "Republicans helped craft it!" I've heard AOC and others talk about issues they don't like in the bipartisan bill, but they're willing to pass it for the greater good. They rightly see one as more important than the other. I get the sense that the "moderates" truly don't give a shit if either passes--they're using this to try and hurt the progressive caucus.

Either way, I'm so glad the progressives didn't listen to fools like Jimmy Dore or Brianha Joy Gray back in January with the Force the Vote thing (they're still bitching about it). I'd much rather the progressives unite and fight for something than an ideological "gotcha" game. Jayapal is truly an excellent leader, and I'm more a fan of her every day.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

LOL. Go reread what you wrote before. You keep moving the goalposts.

Nope, definitely not.  If the progressives followed your advice they would have passed the infrastructure bill on Monday and had absolutely no leverage for Manchin to deal on any of the reconciliation bill. 

Moreover, a major iteration of our argument has been me saying delaying the bill wouldn't be the end of the world and the progressives were absolutely right to maintain leverage by insisting the two bills be passed together, and you saying that would be catastrophic.  If you wanna now preposterously pretend otherwise that's your own deal, I'm done before we get yelled at again.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Source?  She's been harping on austerity and what qualifies for reconciliation and what doesn't since this winter.  She's been quoted as early as June saying she didn't like the price tag on this one.  But your position is, that if Manchin hadn't had any issues with it, shed just go along with it?  

Because I doubt she isolates herself absent having Manchin as a meat shield. It wouldn't make any sense otherwise, not that it really does absent that.

5 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Lol, it's almost like she's been negotiating.

Poorly?

[A True Kaniggit]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Because I doubt she isolates herself absent having Manchin as a meat shield. It wouldn't make any sense otherwise, not that it really does absent that.

Does it make sense the other way around?

Why did Manchin isolate himself absent a meat shield?

Perhaps they were both going to be problems no matter what, and one of them just happened to go first. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Nope, definitely not.  If the progressives followed your advice they would have passed the infrastructure bill on Monday and had absolutely no leverage for Manchin to deal on any of the reconciliation bill. 

No, they would have had a roughly $2.5T bill back in August. Cutting a quick deal splitting the difference between $1.5T and $3.5T was what my hypothetical was all about. You couldn't even live with $2.8T. Enjoy getting less than that while further inflaming intraparty disagreements for no reason at all. 

Quote

Moreover, a major iteration of our argument has been me saying delaying the bill wouldn't be the end of the world and the progressives were absolutely right to maintain leverage by insisting the two bills be passed together, and you saying that would be catastrophic.  If you wanna now preposterously pretend otherwise that's your own deal, I'm done before we get yelled at again.

I have also said it wouldn't be a big deal if House moderates were okay with it. I made that comment before we'd know how they'd act. Once they were cool with a delay it wasn't a big deal, again, until progressives flat out killed it, which was always the point. And so far that hasn't happened, so the comment you made stands as being entirely devoid of reality.

I'm also good stopping this, but it's worth noting each time we get into these spats it's because you constantly misrepresent what I've said, and every time I call you out on it you just ignore it. Debate what I've actually said, not what you want to argue against. 

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Does it make sense the other way around?

Why did Manchin isolate himself absent a meat shield?

Perhaps they were both going to be problems no matter what, and one of them just happened to go first. 

Pretty simple, it doesn't hurt him in WV. He can say he stood up to reckless liberal spending. He's wrong, let that be clear, but it's a good talking point back home.

[DMC]

To be clear, "killing" the vote and demanding both bills be passed together is effectively the exact same thing as "delaying" the vote and demanding both bills be passed together.  The only difference is whether or not Pelosi would hold a floor vote she knew was going to fail.  Not doing so is SOP for most speakers, including her.

[A True Kaniggit]

18 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Pretty simple, it doesn't hurt him in WV. He can say he stood up to reckless liberal spending. He's wrong, let that be clear, but it's a good talking point back home.

Pretty simple, it doesn’t hurt her in AZ. She can say she stood up to reckless liberal spending. She’s wrong, let that be clear, but it’s a good talking point back home.
 

(How many times has Arizona gone blue in the last 10 presidential elections?)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

39 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Pretty simple, it doesn’t hurt her in AZ. She can say she stood up to reckless liberal spending. She’s wrong, let that be clear, but it’s a good talking point back home.
 

(How many times has Arizona gone blue in the last 10 presidential elections?)

Oh I think it does. Her state party is ready to disown her, if you believe the headlines. I think she's going to face a serious primary challenge regardless of how things play out in the next few days/weeks/months. Democrats need Manchin, like it or not. They don't need Sinema given the state of affairs in AZ.

[A True Kaniggit]

20 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Oh I think it does. Her state party is ready to disown her, if you believe the headlines. I think she's going to face a serious primary challenge regardless of how things play out in the next few days/weeks/months. Democrats need Manchin, like it or not. They don't need Sinema given the state of affairs in AZ.

Yes we do.

How else would we pass these bills?

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Because I doubt she isolates herself absent having Manchin as a meat shield. It wouldn't make any sense otherwise, not that it really does absent that.

Poorly?

Cool, just wanted to clear up that it's completely your own fantasy.  And I'm not seeing how Manchin is any meatshield for her, her own state's Dem party is livid.  

It is funny thiugh that someone would think that she never would have thought to do this if it wasn't for Manchin.  

[ThinkerX]

well...I did state a couple times that the bipartisan bill would pass simply because there are enough somewhat rational republican congress critters openly drooling at the prospect of all that money headed towards their states and districts.

 

I also said the reconciliation bill would either flop or take a major cut, on the order of 50%.  My reasoning here stems partly from the deep ideological divide between the centrists and progressives combined with razor thin vote margins, but mostly from the old saying about the democratic party being able to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  

Still, given the last four years, even a 1.5 trillion reconciliation bill is a huge plus.  

 

That said...

I do not see 'Biden 2024.'  Border mess plus Afghanistan debacle plus semi credible accusations of senility which are only going to grow.

I do not see 'Trump 2024' - except perhaps as a fund raising scam.  Mostly, though, I strongly suspect that Trumps health issues are going to catch up with him big time.

I also do not see a 'Harris 2024.'  She takes a big hit on the border issue, plus there is the uncertainty she displayed during the campaign and organizational disaster that was her office.  She gets those cleaned up, scores some sort of clear victory elsewhere....maybe.

Nor do I see Abbot or DeSantis (sp?) 2024 either - mostly because their policies will blow up in their faces in the next year or two.

 

Tucker Carlson 2024 is a distinct possibility - name recognition plus Trump creds.

I do figure, owing to demographic changes and the corona virus, that the state level democratic candidates will do....a bit better than expected even with gerrymandering and voter suppression laws - possibly well enough to inspire panic among republicans - and *MAYBE* flip a few seats.  (I have been tracking a *lot* of hostile republican/conservative comments on 'population shift' articles the past few weeks - which states are gaining and loosing people.  Pretty much across the board, republicans and conservative commentators loath the idea of new immigrants to their states.  Most recent example - a photo showing a police roadblock on a desert highway with the caption 'Texas is Full. Go Away.'  Overwhelmingly positive comments on that one.)

 

  

 

[GrimTuesday]

Coming out of my self imposed exile to remind you all that Tywin's idea of good negotiating is putting out an already gutted offer that you think your opposition will accept, then when they say no, because they are demons and know they can get even more concessions, you piss your pants and do whatever they want.

4 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Nor do I see Abbot or DeSantis (sp?) 2024 either - mostly because their policies will blow up in their faces in the next year or two.

Nah, it's gonna be DeSantis. The politicization of Covid will ensure that there will never be a backlash against people like him, and the Chamber of Commerce and big business will line up because he has literally spent the last year and a half acting as their creature.

[DMC]

Without Trump, DeSantis definitely looks like the prohibitive favorite for the nomination right now.  Of course, being the frontrunner three years out is hardly any guarantee it will happen.

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Pretty simple, it doesn’t hurt her in AZ. She can say she stood up to reckless liberal spending. She’s wrong, let that be clear, but it’s a good talking point back home.
 

(How many times has Arizona gone blue in the last 10 presidential elections

Arizona has been trending blue for quite awhile now. It’s not a state where Trump won by 23 points like WV is.

 

[HoodedCrow]

Let’s start now. DeSantis is Fidel Castro’s nephew.