Jump to content

Joe Biden 2021


tantric superman

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Seems they already forgot that polling showed voters blamed the GOP for the lack of a bipartisan deal on the ARP and not Biden or the Dems. 

That's why they're crazy. Except, I'm figuring they've run the numbers in each of the areas and figure they will either stay safe or can swing votes or manipulate things so it's no big deal. I mean look at Missouri at the state level. They over-rule the will of the people over and over again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just so I'm clear here, D and R senators got in front of a microphone together yesterday and said we have a deal on infrastructure with Biden saying "they gave me their word and that's good enough for me". 

Then after that press conference Pelosi and Biden both say versions of 'the bipartisan bill that was agreed to won't get passed unless it is done in tandem with a reconciliation bill' even though that was apparently not discussed during negotiations.   What was the point of any negotiation if that was going to be the ultimate position?  Why even ask for a single drop of R support if you were going to do a reconciliation bill regardless? I assume the point of the charade was to put pressure on Manachin and KS but who knows.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Just so I'm clear here, D and R senators got in front of a microphone together yesterday and said we have a deal on infrastructure with Biden saying "they gave me their word and that's good enough for me". 

Then after that press conference Pelosi and Biden both say versions of 'the bipartisan bill that was agreed to won't get passed unless it is done in tandem with a reconciliation bill' even though that was apparently not discussed during negotiations.   What was the point of any negotiation if that was going to be the ultimate position?  Why even ask for a single drop of R support if you were going to do a reconciliation bill regardless? I assume the point of the charade was to put pressure on Manachin and KS but who knows.  

There was never any doubt that Democrats were going to be forced into passing a reconciliation bill. No surprise there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Just so I'm clear here, D and R senators got in front of a microphone together yesterday and said we have a deal on infrastructure with Biden saying "they gave me their word and that's good enough for me". 

Then after that press conference Pelosi and Biden both say versions of 'the bipartisan bill that was agreed to won't get passed unless it is done in tandem with a reconciliation bill' even though that was apparently not discussed during negotiations.   What was the point of any negotiation if that was going to be the ultimate position?  Why even ask for a single drop of R support if you were going to do a reconciliation bill regardless? I assume the point of the charade was to put pressure on Manachin and KS but who knows.  

One idea is the GOP and their constituents (corporations, oligarchs, investors, rural states) may have valuable input on hard infrastructure.  With that input, the bill could be better. 

Also since this is politics, we are dealing with perceptions.  Biden has positioned himself in the middle - a guy that can work with both sides.  Having a bipartisan deal feeds that perception.  If the GOP want to slap his hand now, that is fine.  It feeds the perception that they aren't serious about governing, even when it comes to popular issues.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GW Hayduke said:

One idea is the GOP and their constituents (corporations, oligarchs, investors, rural states) may have valuable input on hard infrastructure.  With that input, the bill could be better. 

Also since this is politics, we are dealing with perceptions.  Biden has positioned himself in the middle - a guy that can work with both sides.  Having a bipartisan deal feeds that perception.  If the GOP want to slap his hand now, that is fine.  It feeds the perception that they aren't serious about governing, even when it comes to popular issues.  

It could also be viewed more as a bit of a bait and switch, depending on your perspective.  But, the more I think about it, it really gives Manchin and Sienma cover to approve a big reconciliation bill that, as far as I can tell, they weren't jumping to do, while blaming it on the GOP. "We tried but the GOP didn't want to approve an infrastructure bill so we had to push this one through". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

It could also be viewed more as a bit of a bait and switch, depending on your perspective.  But, the more I think about it, it really gives Manchin and Sienma cover to approve a big reconciliation bill that, as far as I can tell, they weren't jumping to do, while blaming it on the GOP. "We tried but the GOP didn't want to approve an infrastructure bill so we had to push this one through". 

It’s not a bait and switch by the Dems. They all knew it was likely to happen. 

They expected this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Js1 said:

It’s not a bait and switch by the Dems. They all knew it was likely to happen. 

They expected this. 

I don't disagree.  The Rs who negotiated it are acting surprised that passing the bipartisan infrastructure bill would be tied to passing a reconciliation bill with all the other stuff are either stupid, naïve, or purposefully wasted time to try and eat up the clock.  Personally, I don't think they expected the bills to be tied together. Now they can get hung with either being bad faith negotiators, stupid, or if they do pass the reconciliation bill, politically tied to passing a reconciliation bill full of D priorities and spending. 

Really really bad politics by the R negotiating team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

I don't disagree.  The Rs who negotiated it are acting surprised that passing the bipartisan infrastructure bill would be tied to passing a reconciliation bill with all the other stuff are either stupid, naïve, or purposefully wasted time to try and eat up the clock.  Personally, I don't think they expected the bills to be tied together. Now they can get hung with either being bad faith negotiators, stupid, or if they do pass the reconciliation bill, politically tied to passing a reconciliation bill full of D priorities and spending. 

Really really bad politics by the R negotiating team.

It should be noted that the experienced old heads in both parties are by far the most skillful negotiators. They’re even better than the world’s greatest deal maker, Donald Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Eskimohorn said:


I agree. But they at least a made a lucid argument and didnt fling poop.

That’s because their constituents support this infrastructure bill and they want to go home and brag about voting for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/25/2021 at 1:25 PM, Mrs Whiggins said:

That's why they're crazy. Except, I'm figuring they've run the numbers in each of the areas and figure they will either stay safe or can swing votes or manipulate things so it's no big deal. I mean look at Missouri at the state level. They over-rule the will of the people over and over again.

Texas to Missouri: hold my beer...

Sixty-seven percent of Texans support Medicaid expansion, giving overwhelming support to an issue that's been soundly rejected by Republican state leaders since the passage of the Affordable Care Act during Barack Obama's presidency. ... Supporters included 50% of Republicans and 90% of Democrats...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Texas to Missouri: hold my beer...

Sixty-seven percent of Texans support Medicaid expansion, giving overwhelming support to an issue that's been soundly rejected by Republican state leaders since the passage of the Affordable Care Act during Barack Obama's presidency. ... Supporters included 50% of Republicans and 90% of Democrats...

 

 

Missouri, Texas, Pennsylvania--at this point they've got each other on DMs for tips. (and laughs.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Anarchist violent extremists should be considered domestic terrorists. When it rises to the level of targeted violence, it’s terrorism at that point. 

Ideological agendas derived from anti-government sentiment that rises to the level of violence is terrorism. 

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Js1 said:

Yes. Anarchist violent extremists should be considered domestic terrorists. When it rises to the level of targeted violence, it’s terrorism at that point. 

Ideological agendas derived from anti-government sentiment that rises to the level of violence is terrorism. 

Do you support the Patriot Act?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, lmao said:

Do you support the Patriot Act?

Irrelevant question.

There are various groups of violent extremists. Some are motivated by religion. Some by racial supremacy. Some by economic ideals.  What they all have in common is violence. 
 

Biden’s DOJ is not saying all anti-capitalists are violent extremists.  It is saying that some violent extremists oppose capitalism. It should be obvious to most folks. The tweet you shared was a dumb tweet. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Irrelevant question.

There are various groups of violent extremists. Some are motivated by religion. Some by racial supremacy. Some by economic ideals.  What they all have in common is violence. 
 

Biden’s DOJ is not saying all anti-capitalists are violent extremists.  It is saying that some violent extremists oppose capitalism. It should be obvious to most folks. The tweet you shared was a dumb tweet. 

We already have laws on the books & bloated law enforcement. No need to increase the survelliance state & loosley redefine what a domestic terrorist is. If Trump was still in office I assume there would be a lot more mainstream scrutiny of this. 

Edited by lmao
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, lmao said:

We already have laws on the books & bloated law enforcement. No need to increase the survelliance state & loosley redefine what a domestic terrorist is. If Trump was still in office I assume there would be a lot more mainstream scrutiny of this. 

And none of that warrants the fact the tweet you shared was dumb.  Below is the report the dumb tweet references.  The report simply describes threats and makes judgments on which groups pose greater risks. It is a short read.  If you want to share or evaluate the idea that we need less law enforcement or that we need less online monitoring for future violence, this report or a dumb fallacious tweet doesn't help with that. 

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/UnclassSummaryofDVEAssessment-17MAR21.pdf

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

India Walton is a avowed socialist. She was elected by the people in Buffalo. By definition, she opposes capitalism. You may not have noticed, but Biden nor his administration has said a word, or tried to arrest her. Because she has not conducted or threatened violence against humans. Do you see the difference?

There are people that conduct or threaten violence against humans for all types of reasons. The reasons don’t particularly matter except it helps focus resources on the biggest areas of activity. The goal is to stop violence. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

And none of that warrants the fact the tweet you shared was dumb.  Below is the report the dumb tweet references.  The report simply describes threats and makes judgments on which groups pose greater risks. It is a short read.  If you want to share or evaluate the idea that we need less law enforcement or that we need less online monitoring for future violence, this report or a dumb fallacious tweet doesn't help with that. 

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/UnclassSummaryofDVEAssessment-17MAR21.pdf

Twitter hot takes against Democrats get more clicks than hot takes against the GOP.   The very online left is always ready and willing to skewer Democrats for not going too far, too fast or too hard in the paint. 

Plus this shit usually follows with some sort of grifty fundraising because "the corporatist, pro police state Biden admin is labeling me a domestic terrorist because I won't conform to the DNC's corporate belief system and I need your help!" or some shit. 

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Twitter hot takes against Democrats get more clicks than hot takes against the GOP.   The very online left is always ready and willing to skewer Democrats for not going too far, too fast or too hard in the paint. 

Plus this shit usually follows with some sort of grifty fundraising because "the corporatist, pro police state Biden admin is labeling me a domestic terrorist because I won't conform to the DNC's corporate belief system and I need your help!" or some shit. 

Yeah. The left aren't immune from regurgitating dumb twitter takes.  Ideally, we on the left would be less susceptible to dumb twitter takes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

4O2V5XD5UFHILICS236ONUSEMM.JPG

Over/under of total antifa true believers in the entirety of the United States? 500? 1000? 

Meanwhile, I can throw a rock in half the states in this country and hit a member of a "militia" that totally coincidentally was founded when a black man became president.

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...