In two ways. They also killed the chances of further good deals. When they aren’t in power why would democrats ever want to negotiate with them
The last time they had a majority (first mandate of Obama if I recall?) they tried to work with the Republicans in good faith and they got nowhere so fast that the public voted them out from dissatisfaction.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I remember it.
It was a one person majority in the Senate that only lasted for a brief amount of time and was gone once healthcare reform ate up all of the time before Ted Kennedy died. They basically took what Mitt Romney had done at the state level and applied it federally, which is what Republicans claimed to want before they decided to call it Obamacare and pretend they didn't help craft it.
The health care bill contained a series of things that are broadly popular when they were laid out individually. Package them together and call it "Obamacare" in the media and it was suddenly unpopular.
Tea Party astroturfing can't be understated, either. The GOP grabbed back power at just the right time to be able to gerrymander districts and then keep them gerrymandered up until now. We're only beginning to erode that back.
Technically, during the Obama Admin the Democrats had a senate supermajority for I think less than 2 months. During that time no substantial bills hit the senate floor that I recall, but I remember they approved a bunch of USPS locations which seemed odd to me. Politics are crazy but they're even weirder in retrospect.
Because you need 60 votes to do anything in the Senate.
Only until the instant the Senate takes a simple majority vote to lower it to 50.
While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP, it's also a matter of fact that it is an antidemocratic institution that in the longer term we're better off minimizing or eliminating. It's the House of Lords and we do not need a House of Lords in the modern era.
Though I would like to see proper reapportionment in the House of Reps first, including adding significantly more members.
While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP
Has it?
Maybe. Maybe not. I won't come to the defense of that, it was more of a hedge.
The argument works for the House of Lords, which has often acted as a moderating force (and loses power every time it does), despite its antidemocratic nature.
I think it's a non-starter for the Senate. It was deliberately constructed as a conservative brake on Congress, being heavily weighted to smaller (more rural) states which tend to be more conservative. True conservatism is obviously opposed to fascism but in practice, it isn't (and neither is liberalism if it is feeling threatened by socialism).
But muh states rights!
Because corporate dems are basically republicans. Our whole political system is right of center. With a few outliers.
I commented this a while back, and I believe it wholeheartedly -
The current U.S. system is set up so that only two political parties can exist. In a perfect world, they would be rational, and represent differing facets of the voters values/goals. But in addition to not having a perfect world, through manipulation, degradation of the laws, and just human error/unintended consequences, we’ve wound up with a system where the two parties in power are largely funded by corporations, or those who have the resources to create PACs and launder their money into politics, and those groups represent roughly the same values and political goals.
So the political ‘game’ now is to acquire money to campaign (so you can get the votes) by appeasing the donors while appearing to do things that attract voters, because voting has not quite been manipulated to the point where money equals votes, yet. (Save for gerrymandering, which renders the voting ‘problem’ moot.)
I now believe politics is largely theatrical, and the media, also controlled by the interests that fund the political campaigns of politicians that do their bidding, works very hard to keep folks divided and arguing, rather than facing the real problem of their systemic disempowerment.
I am increasingly disillusioned that a solution to this problem is possible.
But anyway - I guess I’m saying I agree with you.
Have you ever listened to Democrats? The leadership keeps saying that they believe we need a strong Republican Party for some reason.
Imagine the soundbites if they said they wanted to destroy the opposition party.
GOP talking heads say the same thing all the time
The difference between the GOP base and the Dem base.
They say this because their lobbyists want nothing to change and if the Republicans are too weak, Democrats may actually have to make peoples lives better or the whole charade falls apart.
For better or worse we have a two dominant party system, which totally breaks down when one party decides to go it alone and only advance causes they can win with their votes.
That is a weak party, so divided internally they don't dare compromise externally.
If we don't have at LEAST two functional parties, it all falls apart.
That sounds like an utterly stupid system that is fragile and easily manipulated... Go figure it's ours...
I'm not arguing with that, but it's the system we have. We can modify it, improve upon it, or let it completely fall apart and be replaced with One Party Rule.
The year is 2006 and Republicans are killing a compromise deal that they all admitted they actually liked.
The year is 2014 and Republicans are killing a compromise deal that they all admitted they actually liked.
The year is 2024 and the GOP is about to win in a landslide on the "Democrats never get anything done" platform, so I guess you can't argue with their results.
Idk if I believe that.
We're about to see a lot of "unlikely voters" turning out....
And to think, running the same guy who tried to cling to power with a self coup after losing the last election in a landslide to the guy you lost to 4 years ago who's supreme court justices "Roe is settled law" brought about headlines of suffering and skyrocketing teen pregnancy.....
Anyway remember that foreign policy is about power, not morality. And if "both sides are the same" no, one side is corporate shills and the other are fascist sycophants.
Not voting for Biden or Not Voting is a vote for the Christian Caliphate where white is right but only if you're a straight male. Everyone else can stay in the kitchen or go to the camps. History doesn't repeat but it rhymes
deleted by creator
My uterus is downright furious. I'm so glad it can't read or it might try arson.
Amen.
Never forget that Democrats were supposed to lose the midterms in a landslide and the economy was the top priority, supposedly. They barely lost the House but made gains in the Senate. And I think if you ask Republicans if they feel like winners in the House... Well, we can all see how that's been going.
And then the clown show that is the house is proving that they don't know how to govern....
Hear hear!
Yo yo
We're about to see a lot of "unlikely voters" turning out....
I'll fucking believe that when I see it.
We’re about to see a lot of “unlikely voters” turning out…
If the primary and the off-cycle elections are any indication, we're going to see a big downturn in participation - particularly among Biden's left wing base - as enthusiasm for another four years of Republican Lite administration tanks out.
Anyway remember that foreign policy is about power, not morality.
Hitler Particles Detected
Not voting for Biden or Not Voting is a vote for the Christian Caliphate
Its not the votes that count, but who counts the votes. And in my home state of Texas, the Governor has already made moves to consolidate election authority in the governor's mansion.
If the primary and the off-cycle elections are any indication, we're going to see a big downturn in participation - particularly among Biden's left wing base - as enthusiasm for another four years of Republican Lite administration tanks out.
This 1000%. You can't keep treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans and expect them to keep voting for you just so we move 2 inches right instead of 4.
EDIT: Look at all the democrats treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans. If leftists are the ones keeping you from winning, maybe it's time to start moving your policy left instead of bullying them while you sprint right to court "centrists" that we all know will NEVER vote for a Democrat as long as they live.
A vote for Democrats isn't a vote against fascism, it's a vote for fascism in 4 years instead of now.
So you'd rather move 100 yards right in your analogy then by ensuring a Trump victory. Got it.
If you want to be an indignant self-righteous leftist deciding to not vote, don't be surprised when you don't get a chance to vote for a leftist candidate four years from now, or ever. You're acting like a petulant child over an extremely important election just because you can't get EXACTLY what you want.
Hey look, a Democrat treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans while expecting us to vote for them so we move 60 yards right instead of 100. 🤷
If leftists are the reason democrats can't pull a win as yall can't stop having an aneurysm screaming at us about, maybe it's time you move your policies left instead of bullying us at every turn as you sprint further right chasing "centrists" we all know will NEVER vote for a dem.
You need to watch Beau of the Fifth Column.
If you want to build a leftist movement it has to start local. Run for the school board. Build a community network
Don't let the fascists win because of the Democrats not being left enough.
You build the coalition from the bottom up, not from the top down.
I vote against fascism,and I vote against genocide. You give me a Democratic candidate that can do better than "I sidestep congress to fund genocide instead of sidestepping congress to commit genocide" and I'll vote for them. 🤷
I can't get over the fact that yall claim to be the "good guys" by backing full fascism in 4 years instead of this year. It's still fascism my guy. Yall keep yelling at us that it's OUR fault for not backing local antifascism, but SPOILERS - YOU'RE THE ONES BACKING FASCISTS.
You keep backing fascism then taking some sort of high ground for doing so. Get the fuck out of here. YOU ARE THE BAD GUYS BECAUSE YOU'RE STILL VOTING FOR FASCISM. You don't magically become the good guy for voting fascist locally as well as nationally.
I read your comment five times over and still don't know what point you're trying to make. It seems like you're insistent on being contrarian and using the "both sides" argument we got back in 2016. Luckily, being through it once made us smarter. Good try, though.
Tell your troll farm buddies to your left and right that we say hi.
and using the "both sides" argument
You mean like how you keep telling everyone the only way to avoid the guy who wants to sidestep congress to enable genocide is the guy who sidestepped congress multiple times to enable genocide?
You can accuse me of being a troll all you want, but you're the one arguing the only thing that can save us from the far right is moving the mid right further right. GTFO with that shit. 😂
But hey, thanks for adding more evidence to my original point that leftists are far more your enemy than Republicans ever were.
Yep this guy's gonna do well in the camps.
You guys need to drop the "liberals" are going to a camp garbage. If the already thinning out Republicans try to attack urban areas in the US they just set themselves for utter defeat as the Spanish attack them from the south, White Americans from the West and East, and Canadians from the North. 30% of Americans will live in the middle of nowhere aren't coming to put us in camps.
Tldr: Stop threatening me with a good time.
Yep go ahead and either not vote or make a protest vote. Just remember your lgbtq friends in the camps.
You shoulda thought of that when you kept voting BNMW and never getting of your fucking couches. And when the xamos start filling up you'll still be on your fucking couches.
I dont think that will fly this time. It's VERY obvious now that they can't do ANYTHING in the house. Their ability to govern has been laid bare.
Meanwhile Biden managed to pass some of the most meaningful and useful legislation in decades with the previous congress. So even if Republicans do nothing, Biden's done more than the last two presidents to move the needle.
Also, they got clowned hard. Biden admitted he'd shut down the border--which is what they were clamoring for him to do. Then they killed it. They dont care about the border and its obvious. This isn't going to be laid at Dems feet.
It’s VERY obvious now that they can’t do ANYTHING in the house.
But it is equally obvious that guys like Abbot and DeSantis have an open hand to act as they please on the border. That's where this gets dangerous.
By bogging down the legislative process and allowing Biden to twiddle his thumbs in the White House, we have transferred enormous amounts of power to the border states with the most horrific people in charge. The GOP decision to kill the bill was calculated, as it accrued authority to their allies in the Southwest.
Also, they got clowned hard.
They got laughed at by the same group of jokers who were going to point and laugh at them regardless. Meanwhile, right-wing talk radio is spinning this as a victory for the Immigration Absolutists and a rallying cry for the Trump Presidential campaign.
Democrats have shown their hand on what they will concede. Republicans are in a strong position to advance their majorities in House and Senate into the next cycle. That puts the ball in their court, even if Mike Johnson personally looks like a weak Speaker. Republicans don't care if he's weak, because they've put all their chips on Trump anyway.
The year is 2024 and the GOP is about to win in a landslide on the "Democrats never get anything done" platform, so I guess you can't argue with their results.
2018 is going to be a red wave
2020 is going to be a red wave
2022 is going to be a red wave
Surely 2024 will be a red wave!
You left out 2016, 2014, 2010, 2002, and 1994.
Surely 2024 will be a red wave!
The gains Dems have made in the Midwest are heavily predicated on minority voters (particularly Arab Americans) sticking with the party. And it looks like Biden's getting ready to piss all that away.
So, these elections are basically down to independent voters.
Not the leftists that hate both parties and say they're independent voters
Not the libertarians that hate both parties and say they're independent
But the actual independents, especially those in swing states - that vote for either opposing party - is what these elections come down to.
And weve already seen how they voted in the midterms, despite a shit economy.
If it's Biden versus Trump, I'd wager it's a Biden win
I hate both parties and I say I'm independent, as I realize they are both beholden to their corporate interests and lobbyists.
The system isn't designed for people with good ideas to emerge and change things for the better, but I like to think at some point in the future individuals like that could win outside of party lines. They have us all mixed up in these culture wars while the rich people keep on getting richer at an accelerated pace.
But you are right, I'm going to vote for my version of less crazy, along with everyone else, and we'll collectively go nowhere until the current crop of politicians age out or die.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to throw this in every Trump voter's face any time they mention the border or national security ever again. They'll be back to know-nothing cockroach status again in 2025.
Yeah, that'll work about as well as reminding them about the Reagan tax cuts, Bush's wars, and Trump's fuckery ballooned the national debt that they're always so "worried" about.
I've used similar pressure about Trump's steel tariffs to shut chuds up about politics. It works.
Could you elaborate? I like to shut chuds up too but I no has smart.
Somebody I know tried to lie and say Trump was good for the economy because the steel trade war with China was somehow a patriotic, protectionist thing to do. Most of the rest of the family is not as educated as we are and don't really care how something like steel tariffs work. I like to let a lot of bullshit go, but not that time.
In pretty much any policy field you can find examples of how Trump mechanically goes against the things he says he is.
Sabotaging the border deal was the worst thing he could have done. Man could have been unofficial speaker of the house and he blew it because of his ego, maybe not thinking straight on account of 91 felony indictments
I can tell you exactly what they'll say, actually, "The Bill gave billions to Ukraine and Israel and 20 Million for border defence what a joke" and at that point you should remind them that they instead decided to give $0 to the border defence, delegitimized Abbot's perimeter for drowning women and children, and the next time the GOP have power they still won't do anything because they'll have created another massive deficit like they always do.
Imagine overlooking the benefit to your citizens because you want your would be leader to do it instead.
And people still vote for these pieces of shit
We need to start labeling all politicians that go against the citizens enemies of the state. They should be allowed only a public defender. Life in prison or choice of beheading. Expedited charging of no more than 30 days. No last meals. We want cheap costs and swift resolutions, they fight against citizens they should be relieved of the rights awarded to citizens.
Edit: A lot of people here are anti the people and pro politicians going against what their representation represents. That cowardice is why the supreme Court will rule an insurrectionist can be president, and then they will be removed/killed if they try to say otherwise after. Tolerate fascism... We are doomed
I feel like you didn’t think that all the way through before you wrote it
Calm down there Saudi Arabia
I know, right?
You have the 2nd amendment. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"
Just shoot them.
Yeah, perpetuate the cycle of dehumanizing violence! That'll show them what's what!
If you’re ever arguing with a relative, remember that this is the most unproductive House of Representatives that we’ve ever had. Ever. They’re barely even working in there. Why? Because republicans are sitting on their hands for everything
If talking to a relative remind them that the border patrol themselves supported this bill despite normally criticizing Biden.
That's what will fluster them the most.
CBP, USBP, and ICE would have all benefited SO much from this bill.
Voters are dumb as fuck or lazy. It should be a complete wipe out so many times over but the fact that it's even remotely close is crazy.
You'll have some person come in and say the usual: "the Dems can't work or get stuff done".
This type of thing should ensure none of them should work in public office again but the voters ain't gonna do shit.
I'm a voter. I will 'do shit'. It's a fucked up world and many people fit your generalization, but it's the job of reasonable people everywhere to educate others and promote sanity and optimism wherever possible.
Yeah, you're right. I think Jon Stewart said that he hates apathy and all that when he first departed the Daily Show.
I just think my wall-to-wall coverage of all of this has angered me too much.
Thanks for being a reasonable voice.
I'm glad that he's coming back. I think he's likely to call out apathetic people and give them a reality check.
I’m a voter. I will ‘do shit’. It’s a fucked up world and many people fit your generalization, but it’s the job of reasonable people everywhere to educate others and promote sanity and optimism wherever possible.
Thank you citizen for your efforts.
promote sanity and optimism
Exactly. Optimism is how you win elections. It gives us the hope that a better tomorrow is possible, and our efforts will get us closer to it.
Complacency and apathy are the enemies. After 2022, I don't really care much for polls. It's nice to know the vibe, but they are descriptive, not prescriptive.
Voters are dumb as fuck or lazy.
You've got a pair of parties, one of which refuses to do anything particularly popular while they're in office because that wouldn't be bipartisan and another of which only does the most vulgar populist shit imaginable as soon as they get the reins. Who are voters supposed to support?
You’ll have some person come in and say the usual: “the Dems can’t work or get stuff done”.
Give me one reason why Democrats couldn't pass DC Statehood. They had three big golden opportunities - in '93 and '09 and '21 - to pick up a full sized state complete with 2 Senators and 6 House Reps that would be the most reliably Dem state in the union from now until the next major party alignment, and they refused to do it every fucking time.
There is no downside to DC statehood for Democrats.
This is just the tip of the iceberg on "Things Democrats could easily do if they actually wanted to". But we consistently see legislators, executives, and party leaders alike drag their feet and pass out unpopular compromises, rather than pushing through reforms that are both wildly popular and obviously beneficial to their partisan interests.
This isn't a voter problem. It is entirely a problem within the party leadership - much of which is totally opaque and intractable to the voting public.
Exactly this, and I'm sick of getting blamed for their incompetence.
How exactly do you think laws get passed? It's not like Democrats in the house can just vote harder and overcome the Republican majority.
Give me one reason why Democrats couldn’t pass DC Statehood.
They need either 60 votes in the Senate, which they don't have, or 50 votes in the Senate to get rid of the filibuster, which they don't have.
Fact of the matter is they don't have the votes. I suspect you'll call it controlled opposition and "there'll always be someone because Democrats don't actually want it", but that's baseless theory. Especially since the last time Dems did have those votes, for a scant 2 months, they put together Obamacare. It even had single payer, but the 60th vote they needed refused to support it unless they took it out.
You could get 49 ideal leftist socialists elected, but as long as there's 1 detractor, the party can't do anything. And it's silly idealism to think that some mean words will make that single detractor come to your side.
This right here.
At this point, I think that people asking "Why didn't Democrats do X and Y" posts are sea-lioning, and not asking in good faith. "I'm just asking questions!"
And Joe Fucking Yacht-boy Manchin was the best we will ever get from West Virginia - maybe for the rest of our lifetimes.
They need either 60 votes in the Senate
Democrats can get rid of that number at the start of any Congressional session. They have deliberately chosen not to do so, because they cling to the idea of bipartisan reforms passing through the upper chamber.
You could get 49 ideal leftist socialists elected, but as long as there’s 1 detractor
You offer the detractor the carrot or the stick. Very easy to wipe the vote of a Senator when the next Defense Authorization bill is up for a vote and everyone is talking about which bases to close.
Bush did not need 60 votes. Trump did not need 60 votes. Reagan sure as hell did not need 60 votes.
Democrats are lying to themselves if they think 60 is a magic number. They're lying even harder if they think 49 Socialist Party Senators would not be able to whip support for their policies, given how ably the GOP has skated by with a meager 40.
Do you have any examples of a carrot or stick actually convincing a politician to change their mind? If that worked, you could just shame Republicans into getting 100-0 votes for everything.
This is what's ridiculous to me. You're cynical and conspiratorial that there will always be controlled opposition, but you also think a bully pulpit and the right words will convince that opposition to support you.
Do you have any examples of a carrot or stick actually convincing a politician to change their mind?
The Civil Rights Act was a big one.
Could you elaborate? I'm genuinely interested in knowing more.
I mean, I don't want to be snide but... there's an ample backlog of historical material that gets into the details. Just pick up a book. Nick Kotz's "Judgement Days" offers a deep dive. Chapter 17 of Howard Zinn's "People's HIstory" gives you the abbreviated version. There are plenty of others.
From Johnson's acerbic legislative style to the economic leverage applied by MLK's boycotts and the militant organizing of Malcolm X's radicals, historically intractable politicians were swayed with both the carrot of an enormous new activist constituency and the stick of strikes, shut-downs, and the President literally grabbing and twisting your ballsack because you failed to deliver him the votes.
The point was never to secure the border, the point was to make it look like Democrats weren't.
it was a gift, and they tossed it because the democrats might look good for compromising and working across-the-aisle.
The point was to elevate their invented crisis by rhetorically placing it on the same level as a genocide in Ukraine.
Its ALWAYS one vote short. The 60th voter- ONE FUCKING PERSON-fucked the entire voting popukation.
It is absolutely controlled opposition, every time.
Pussies for Trump should be their catchphrase.
They lack the warmth and depth to be pussies.
The only thing that matters to authoritarians is that they win. They do not care if they are king of the shitpile, or if the world burns down around them. As long as other people are kissing their ass while it happens.
Just wanted to point out if you've got a spare half hour, it's worth listening to the audio in the article where they interview Michael Bennett. He hits on a lot of nuances about the immigration issue that isn't often covered in most articles.
Thank you, I wouldn't have listened otherwise!
Yeah, yeah, yeah. We all know that Republicans are nothing more than fucking cowards that won't ever do what's right and will always bitch and fucking moan about how they know they're shit people when they're alone.
The rest of us are admitting it in public, so maybe they should too.
This should be in the dictionary under the phrase "Cutting off your nose to spite your face."
Is this the only good deal that they've ever acknowledged? All the other good deals that'd benefit Americans just weren't good deals in their eyes that they happily shot down, but this one was the exception to them?
Yes. This was a wet dream for Republicans who want to dehumanize migrants. This was the only "good" bill in their evil twisted eyes.
This is in public
Why am I not surprised everyone in this thread thinks that conservative border bill was good.
Nobody does. We just laugh at the GOP for killing something that contains three items, and all three are things they would have supported without hesitation 10 years ago.
It wasn't good. What was good however is conservatives voting against a conservative border bill that they demanded go with Ukraine aid -- while also complaining that the two things were tied together.
It was a political masterstroke. Not only is it impossible for Republicans to say they're independent of Trump's demands, but there's now chaos and rebellion within their ranks.
TLDR; Americans won't vote, then yet still complain about the outcome.
More like many Americans actively vote against their own self interests then complain that the government doesn't look out for them. Kind of a 'leopard ate my face after I voted for the face eating leopard party' situation
I agree with you in some ways, but I don't think the "voting against their self-interests" argument is very strong.
My interests are higher taxes, finding public transportation and public healthcare. In their short-term simple view, I want higher taxes, so I'm the one voting against my self-interests. They live mostly in rural areas which public transportation doesn't serve at all.
Their interests are lower taxes and hating & doing bad things to people in the out-crowd. Again they only view short-term with a limited empathetic view. So they have no empathy for the out-crowd, until they find themselves or a loved one in the out-crowd. This the leopards eat faces, and we such on them for their lack of empathy giving them their due.
I wish we could open their mind to greater empathy and to be more future-thinking, but their brains are broken, I think.
Another $14 billion to Israel
Another $60 billion to Ukraine
This bill was shit and we should be glad it's dead
War hawks cope and seethe
Ukraine is a bulwark against Russian aggression. If it falls, Russia will be emboldened to bully other countries with impunity. That isn't being a war hawk - it's defending the status quo and its benefits.
Why should we send 74 billion in aid to Israel and Ukraine when 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, we are the only OECD nation without some form of universal healthcare, and over 650,000 Americans are homeless (a 12 percent increase during 2023). Do you honestly believe that there is a higher priority to send obscenely large sums of money in the form of aid to other countries rather than focusing on the material issues we face as a nation?
Unless you want to house people in tanks or feed them RPGs, this money was never going to help them in the first place. We don't ship over pallets of $100 bills, we send them munitions that are going to expire soon and will need replacing.
This is such a low effort response that showcases US apathy for it's own poverty conditions. Of the $75.4 billion sent to Ukraine alone, only $26.4 billion was financial (loans, funds, other financial support), and on top of that only $2.7 billion is used for humanitarian purposes like food, healthcare, etc). The remaining $46.3 billion is reflected as military spending towards weapons and equipment, security training, grants and loans for weapons, etc, all of which is covered from our $800 billion dollar "defense" budget.
So now that we've addressed your concerns about how tax dollars fund military spending, I ask again, do you honestly believe that there is a higher priority to spend large sums of money in the form of aid to other countries rather than focusing on the material issues we face as a nation?
How is the status quo benefiting anyone? The lines aren't moving, soldiers and civilians are dying daily.
And yes, you are still a war hawk if you support the status quo of war to continue.
IMO Ukraine should be admitted to NATO after negotiating a peace treaty.
I agree with the Israel part.
Russia needs to learn the hard way not to start ground wars in europe
I'd argue they already did and yeah fuck Putin but we should be questioning whether it is morally right to support a stalemate that is killing a whole generation of Ukrainian men.
We should absolutely be questioning how it is the American's responsibility to support that indefinitely with taxes when we are so insanely in debt. How are any of these carve-outs appropriate in an "Immigration" bill?
Strangely, a lot of the military support we give to other countries is basically free. We maintain a vast stockpile of munitions that all have an expiration date. A lot of these billions going to our allies would just go to a very expensive landfill otherwise. I don't know to what extent that was true in these cases.
Furthermore, I think giving Ukrainians the means to defend their country, even dying to do so, is preferable to allowing Russia to slow-genocide them like Israel is doing to Palestinians. It's not our "responsibility" to get involved, but it is in our best interest to oppose Putin.
To your last point, it has nothing to do with immigration, but that was the deal Republicans demanded.
In two ways. They also killed the chances of further good deals. When they aren’t in power why would democrats ever want to negotiate with them
The last time they had a majority (first mandate of Obama if I recall?) they tried to work with the Republicans in good faith and they got nowhere so fast that the public voted them out from dissatisfaction.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I remember it.
It was a one person majority in the Senate that only lasted for a brief amount of time and was gone once healthcare reform ate up all of the time before Ted Kennedy died. They basically took what Mitt Romney had done at the state level and applied it federally, which is what Republicans claimed to want before they decided to call it Obamacare and pretend they didn't help craft it.
The health care bill contained a series of things that are broadly popular when they were laid out individually. Package them together and call it "Obamacare" in the media and it was suddenly unpopular.
Tea Party astroturfing can't be understated, either. The GOP grabbed back power at just the right time to be able to gerrymander districts and then keep them gerrymandered up until now. We're only beginning to erode that back.
Technically, during the Obama Admin the Democrats had a senate supermajority for I think less than 2 months. During that time no substantial bills hit the senate floor that I recall, but I remember they approved a bunch of USPS locations which seemed odd to me. Politics are crazy but they're even weirder in retrospect.
Because you need 60 votes to do anything in the Senate.
Only until the instant the Senate takes a simple majority vote to lower it to 50.
While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP, it's also a matter of fact that it is an antidemocratic institution that in the longer term we're better off minimizing or eliminating. It's the House of Lords and we do not need a House of Lords in the modern era.
Though I would like to see proper reapportionment in the House of Reps first, including adding significantly more members.
Has it?
Maybe. Maybe not. I won't come to the defense of that, it was more of a hedge.
The argument works for the House of Lords, which has often acted as a moderating force (and loses power every time it does), despite its antidemocratic nature.
I think it's a non-starter for the Senate. It was deliberately constructed as a conservative brake on Congress, being heavily weighted to smaller (more rural) states which tend to be more conservative. True conservatism is obviously opposed to fascism but in practice, it isn't (and neither is liberalism if it is feeling threatened by socialism).
But muh states rights!
Because corporate dems are basically republicans. Our whole political system is right of center. With a few outliers.
I commented this a while back, and I believe it wholeheartedly -
The current U.S. system is set up so that only two political parties can exist. In a perfect world, they would be rational, and represent differing facets of the voters values/goals. But in addition to not having a perfect world, through manipulation, degradation of the laws, and just human error/unintended consequences, we’ve wound up with a system where the two parties in power are largely funded by corporations, or those who have the resources to create PACs and launder their money into politics, and those groups represent roughly the same values and political goals.
So the political ‘game’ now is to acquire money to campaign (so you can get the votes) by appeasing the donors while appearing to do things that attract voters, because voting has not quite been manipulated to the point where money equals votes, yet. (Save for gerrymandering, which renders the voting ‘problem’ moot.)
I now believe politics is largely theatrical, and the media, also controlled by the interests that fund the political campaigns of politicians that do their bidding, works very hard to keep folks divided and arguing, rather than facing the real problem of their systemic disempowerment.
I am increasingly disillusioned that a solution to this problem is possible.
But anyway - I guess I’m saying I agree with you.
Have you ever listened to Democrats? The leadership keeps saying that they believe we need a strong Republican Party for some reason.
Imagine the soundbites if they said they wanted to destroy the opposition party.
GOP talking heads say the same thing all the time
The difference between the GOP base and the Dem base.
They say this because their lobbyists want nothing to change and if the Republicans are too weak, Democrats may actually have to make peoples lives better or the whole charade falls apart.
For better or worse we have a two dominant party system, which totally breaks down when one party decides to go it alone and only advance causes they can win with their votes.
That is a weak party, so divided internally they don't dare compromise externally.
If we don't have at LEAST two functional parties, it all falls apart.
That sounds like an utterly stupid system that is fragile and easily manipulated... Go figure it's ours...
I'm not arguing with that, but it's the system we have. We can modify it, improve upon it, or let it completely fall apart and be replaced with One Party Rule.
For the sheer joy of capitulation.
The year is 2006 and Republicans are killing a compromise deal that they all admitted they actually liked.
The year is 2014 and Republicans are killing a compromise deal that they all admitted they actually liked.
The year is 2024 and the GOP is about to win in a landslide on the "Democrats never get anything done" platform, so I guess you can't argue with their results.
Idk if I believe that.
We're about to see a lot of "unlikely voters" turning out....
And to think, running the same guy who tried to cling to power with a self coup after losing the last election in a landslide to the guy you lost to 4 years ago who's supreme court justices "Roe is settled law" brought about headlines of suffering and skyrocketing teen pregnancy.....
Anyway remember that foreign policy is about power, not morality. And if "both sides are the same" no, one side is corporate shills and the other are fascist sycophants.
Not voting for Biden or Not Voting is a vote for the Christian Caliphate where white is right but only if you're a straight male. Everyone else can stay in the kitchen or go to the camps. History doesn't repeat but it rhymes
deleted by creator
My uterus is downright furious. I'm so glad it can't read or it might try arson.
Amen.
Never forget that Democrats were supposed to lose the midterms in a landslide and the economy was the top priority, supposedly. They barely lost the House but made gains in the Senate. And I think if you ask Republicans if they feel like winners in the House... Well, we can all see how that's been going.
And then the clown show that is the house is proving that they don't know how to govern....
Hear hear!
Yo yo
I'll fucking believe that when I see it.
If the primary and the off-cycle elections are any indication, we're going to see a big downturn in participation - particularly among Biden's left wing base - as enthusiasm for another four years of Republican Lite administration tanks out.
Hitler Particles Detected
Its not the votes that count, but who counts the votes. And in my home state of Texas, the Governor has already made moves to consolidate election authority in the governor's mansion.
This 1000%. You can't keep treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans and expect them to keep voting for you just so we move 2 inches right instead of 4.
EDIT: Look at all the democrats treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans. If leftists are the ones keeping you from winning, maybe it's time to start moving your policy left instead of bullying them while you sprint right to court "centrists" that we all know will NEVER vote for a Democrat as long as they live.
A vote for Democrats isn't a vote against fascism, it's a vote for fascism in 4 years instead of now.
So you'd rather move 100 yards right in your analogy then by ensuring a Trump victory. Got it.
If you want to be an indignant self-righteous leftist deciding to not vote, don't be surprised when you don't get a chance to vote for a leftist candidate four years from now, or ever. You're acting like a petulant child over an extremely important election just because you can't get EXACTLY what you want.
Hey look, a Democrat treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans while expecting us to vote for them so we move 60 yards right instead of 100. 🤷
If leftists are the reason democrats can't pull a win as yall can't stop having an aneurysm screaming at us about, maybe it's time you move your policies left instead of bullying us at every turn as you sprint further right chasing "centrists" we all know will NEVER vote for a dem.
You need to watch Beau of the Fifth Column.
If you want to build a leftist movement it has to start local. Run for the school board. Build a community network
Don't let the fascists win because of the Democrats not being left enough.
You build the coalition from the bottom up, not from the top down.
I vote against fascism,and I vote against genocide. You give me a Democratic candidate that can do better than "I sidestep congress to fund genocide instead of sidestepping congress to commit genocide" and I'll vote for them. 🤷
I can't get over the fact that yall claim to be the "good guys" by backing full fascism in 4 years instead of this year. It's still fascism my guy. Yall keep yelling at us that it's OUR fault for not backing local antifascism, but SPOILERS - YOU'RE THE ONES BACKING FASCISTS.
You keep backing fascism then taking some sort of high ground for doing so. Get the fuck out of here. YOU ARE THE BAD GUYS BECAUSE YOU'RE STILL VOTING FOR FASCISM. You don't magically become the good guy for voting fascist locally as well as nationally.
I read your comment five times over and still don't know what point you're trying to make. It seems like you're insistent on being contrarian and using the "both sides" argument we got back in 2016. Luckily, being through it once made us smarter. Good try, though.
Tell your troll farm buddies to your left and right that we say hi.
You mean like how you keep telling everyone the only way to avoid the guy who wants to sidestep congress to enable genocide is the guy who sidestepped congress multiple times to enable genocide?
You can accuse me of being a troll all you want, but you're the one arguing the only thing that can save us from the far right is moving the mid right further right. GTFO with that shit. 😂
But hey, thanks for adding more evidence to my original point that leftists are far more your enemy than Republicans ever were.
Yep this guy's gonna do well in the camps.
You guys need to drop the "liberals" are going to a camp garbage. If the already thinning out Republicans try to attack urban areas in the US they just set themselves for utter defeat as the Spanish attack them from the south, White Americans from the West and East, and Canadians from the North. 30% of Americans will live in the middle of nowhere aren't coming to put us in camps.
Tldr: Stop threatening me with a good time.
Yep go ahead and either not vote or make a protest vote. Just remember your lgbtq friends in the camps.
You shoulda thought of that when you kept voting BNMW and never getting of your fucking couches. And when the xamos start filling up you'll still be on your fucking couches.
I dont think that will fly this time. It's VERY obvious now that they can't do ANYTHING in the house. Their ability to govern has been laid bare.
Meanwhile Biden managed to pass some of the most meaningful and useful legislation in decades with the previous congress. So even if Republicans do nothing, Biden's done more than the last two presidents to move the needle.
Also, they got clowned hard. Biden admitted he'd shut down the border--which is what they were clamoring for him to do. Then they killed it. They dont care about the border and its obvious. This isn't going to be laid at Dems feet.
But it is equally obvious that guys like Abbot and DeSantis have an open hand to act as they please on the border. That's where this gets dangerous.
By bogging down the legislative process and allowing Biden to twiddle his thumbs in the White House, we have transferred enormous amounts of power to the border states with the most horrific people in charge. The GOP decision to kill the bill was calculated, as it accrued authority to their allies in the Southwest.
They got laughed at by the same group of jokers who were going to point and laugh at them regardless. Meanwhile, right-wing talk radio is spinning this as a victory for the Immigration Absolutists and a rallying cry for the Trump Presidential campaign.
Democrats have shown their hand on what they will concede. Republicans are in a strong position to advance their majorities in House and Senate into the next cycle. That puts the ball in their court, even if Mike Johnson personally looks like a weak Speaker. Republicans don't care if he's weak, because they've put all their chips on Trump anyway.
2018 is going to be a red wave2020 is going to be a red wave2022 is going to be a red waveSurely 2024 will be a red wave!
You left out 2016, 2014, 2010, 2002, and 1994.
The gains Dems have made in the Midwest are heavily predicated on minority voters (particularly Arab Americans) sticking with the party. And it looks like Biden's getting ready to piss all that away.
So, these elections are basically down to independent voters.
Not the leftists that hate both parties and say they're independent voters
Not the libertarians that hate both parties and say they're independent
But the actual independents, especially those in swing states - that vote for either opposing party - is what these elections come down to.
And weve already seen how they voted in the midterms, despite a shit economy.
If it's Biden versus Trump, I'd wager it's a Biden win
I hate both parties and I say I'm independent, as I realize they are both beholden to their corporate interests and lobbyists.
The system isn't designed for people with good ideas to emerge and change things for the better, but I like to think at some point in the future individuals like that could win outside of party lines. They have us all mixed up in these culture wars while the rich people keep on getting richer at an accelerated pace.
But you are right, I'm going to vote for my version of less crazy, along with everyone else, and we'll collectively go nowhere until the current crop of politicians age out or die.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to throw this in every Trump voter's face any time they mention the border or national security ever again. They'll be back to know-nothing cockroach status again in 2025.
Yeah, that'll work about as well as reminding them about the Reagan tax cuts, Bush's wars, and Trump's fuckery ballooned the national debt that they're always so "worried" about.
I've used similar pressure about Trump's steel tariffs to shut chuds up about politics. It works.
Could you elaborate? I like to shut chuds up too but I no has smart.
Somebody I know tried to lie and say Trump was good for the economy because the steel trade war with China was somehow a patriotic, protectionist thing to do. Most of the rest of the family is not as educated as we are and don't really care how something like steel tariffs work. I like to let a lot of bullshit go, but not that time.
In pretty much any policy field you can find examples of how Trump mechanically goes against the things he says he is.
Sabotaging the border deal was the worst thing he could have done. Man could have been unofficial speaker of the house and he blew it because of his ego, maybe not thinking straight on account of 91 felony indictments
I can tell you exactly what they'll say, actually, "The Bill gave billions to Ukraine and Israel and 20 Million for border defence what a joke" and at that point you should remind them that they instead decided to give $0 to the border defence, delegitimized Abbot's perimeter for drowning women and children, and the next time the GOP have power they still won't do anything because they'll have created another massive deficit like they always do.
Imagine overlooking the benefit to your citizens because you want your would be leader to do it instead.
And people still vote for these pieces of shit
We need to start labeling all politicians that go against the citizens enemies of the state. They should be allowed only a public defender. Life in prison or choice of beheading. Expedited charging of no more than 30 days. No last meals. We want cheap costs and swift resolutions, they fight against citizens they should be relieved of the rights awarded to citizens.
Edit: A lot of people here are anti the people and pro politicians going against what their representation represents. That cowardice is why the supreme Court will rule an insurrectionist can be president, and then they will be removed/killed if they try to say otherwise after. Tolerate fascism... We are doomed
I feel like you didn’t think that all the way through before you wrote it
Calm down there Saudi Arabia
I know, right?
You have the 2nd amendment. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"
Just shoot them.
Yeah, perpetuate the cycle of dehumanizing violence! That'll show them what's what!
If you’re ever arguing with a relative, remember that this is the most unproductive House of Representatives that we’ve ever had. Ever. They’re barely even working in there. Why? Because republicans are sitting on their hands for everything
If talking to a relative remind them that the border patrol themselves supported this bill despite normally criticizing Biden.
That's what will fluster them the most.
CBP, USBP, and ICE would have all benefited SO much from this bill.
Voters are dumb as fuck or lazy. It should be a complete wipe out so many times over but the fact that it's even remotely close is crazy.
You'll have some person come in and say the usual: "the Dems can't work or get stuff done".
This type of thing should ensure none of them should work in public office again but the voters ain't gonna do shit.
I'm a voter. I will 'do shit'. It's a fucked up world and many people fit your generalization, but it's the job of reasonable people everywhere to educate others and promote sanity and optimism wherever possible.
Yeah, you're right. I think Jon Stewart said that he hates apathy and all that when he first departed the Daily Show.
I just think my wall-to-wall coverage of all of this has angered me too much.
Thanks for being a reasonable voice.
I'm glad that he's coming back. I think he's likely to call out apathetic people and give them a reality check.
Thank you citizen for your efforts.
Exactly. Optimism is how you win elections. It gives us the hope that a better tomorrow is possible, and our efforts will get us closer to it.
Complacency and apathy are the enemies. After 2022, I don't really care much for polls. It's nice to know the vibe, but they are descriptive, not prescriptive.
You've got a pair of parties, one of which refuses to do anything particularly popular while they're in office because that wouldn't be bipartisan and another of which only does the most vulgar populist shit imaginable as soon as they get the reins. Who are voters supposed to support?
Give me one reason why Democrats couldn't pass DC Statehood. They had three big golden opportunities - in '93 and '09 and '21 - to pick up a full sized state complete with 2 Senators and 6 House Reps that would be the most reliably Dem state in the union from now until the next major party alignment, and they refused to do it every fucking time.
There is no downside to DC statehood for Democrats.
This is just the tip of the iceberg on "Things Democrats could easily do if they actually wanted to". But we consistently see legislators, executives, and party leaders alike drag their feet and pass out unpopular compromises, rather than pushing through reforms that are both wildly popular and obviously beneficial to their partisan interests.
This isn't a voter problem. It is entirely a problem within the party leadership - much of which is totally opaque and intractable to the voting public.
Exactly this, and I'm sick of getting blamed for their incompetence.
How exactly do you think laws get passed? It's not like Democrats in the house can just vote harder and overcome the Republican majority.
They need either 60 votes in the Senate, which they don't have, or 50 votes in the Senate to get rid of the filibuster, which they don't have.
Fact of the matter is they don't have the votes. I suspect you'll call it controlled opposition and "there'll always be someone because Democrats don't actually want it", but that's baseless theory. Especially since the last time Dems did have those votes, for a scant 2 months, they put together Obamacare. It even had single payer, but the 60th vote they needed refused to support it unless they took it out.
You could get 49 ideal leftist socialists elected, but as long as there's 1 detractor, the party can't do anything. And it's silly idealism to think that some mean words will make that single detractor come to your side.
This right here.
At this point, I think that people asking "Why didn't Democrats do X and Y" posts are sea-lioning, and not asking in good faith. "I'm just asking questions!"
And Joe Fucking Yacht-boy Manchin was the best we will ever get from West Virginia - maybe for the rest of our lifetimes.
Democrats can get rid of that number at the start of any Congressional session. They have deliberately chosen not to do so, because they cling to the idea of bipartisan reforms passing through the upper chamber.
You offer the detractor the carrot or the stick. Very easy to wipe the vote of a Senator when the next Defense Authorization bill is up for a vote and everyone is talking about which bases to close.
Bush did not need 60 votes. Trump did not need 60 votes. Reagan sure as hell did not need 60 votes.
Democrats are lying to themselves if they think 60 is a magic number. They're lying even harder if they think 49 Socialist Party Senators would not be able to whip support for their policies, given how ably the GOP has skated by with a meager 40.
Do you have any examples of a carrot or stick actually convincing a politician to change their mind? If that worked, you could just shame Republicans into getting 100-0 votes for everything.
This is what's ridiculous to me. You're cynical and conspiratorial that there will always be controlled opposition, but you also think a bully pulpit and the right words will convince that opposition to support you.
The Civil Rights Act was a big one.
Could you elaborate? I'm genuinely interested in knowing more.
I mean, I don't want to be snide but... there's an ample backlog of historical material that gets into the details. Just pick up a book. Nick Kotz's "Judgement Days" offers a deep dive. Chapter 17 of Howard Zinn's "People's HIstory" gives you the abbreviated version. There are plenty of others.
From Johnson's acerbic legislative style to the economic leverage applied by MLK's boycotts and the militant organizing of Malcolm X's radicals, historically intractable politicians were swayed with both the carrot of an enormous new activist constituency and the stick of strikes, shut-downs, and the President literally grabbing and twisting your ballsack because you failed to deliver him the votes.
The point was never to secure the border, the point was to make it look like Democrats weren't.
it was a gift, and they tossed it because the democrats might look good for compromising and working across-the-aisle.
The point was to elevate their invented crisis by rhetorically placing it on the same level as a genocide in Ukraine.
Its ALWAYS one vote short. The 60th voter- ONE FUCKING PERSON-fucked the entire voting popukation.
It is absolutely controlled opposition, every time.
Pussies for Trump should be their catchphrase.
They lack the warmth and depth to be pussies.
The only thing that matters to authoritarians is that they win. They do not care if they are king of the shitpile, or if the world burns down around them. As long as other people are kissing their ass while it happens.
Just wanted to point out if you've got a spare half hour, it's worth listening to the audio in the article where they interview Michael Bennett. He hits on a lot of nuances about the immigration issue that isn't often covered in most articles.
Thank you, I wouldn't have listened otherwise!
Yeah, yeah, yeah. We all know that Republicans are nothing more than fucking cowards that won't ever do what's right and will always bitch and fucking moan about how they know they're shit people when they're alone.
The rest of us are admitting it in public, so maybe they should too.
This should be in the dictionary under the phrase "Cutting off your nose to spite your face."
I'm pretty sure it's "spider face" /s
Don't worry friend. I got your office reference
That doesn't even make sense as a joke...
Have you ever seen a spider with a nose?
Is this the only good deal that they've ever acknowledged? All the other good deals that'd benefit Americans just weren't good deals in their eyes that they happily shot down, but this one was the exception to them?
Yes. This was a wet dream for Republicans who want to dehumanize migrants. This was the only "good" bill in their evil twisted eyes.
This is in public
Why am I not surprised everyone in this thread thinks that conservative border bill was good.
Nobody does. We just laugh at the GOP for killing something that contains three items, and all three are things they would have supported without hesitation 10 years ago.
It wasn't good. What was good however is conservatives voting against a conservative border bill that they demanded go with Ukraine aid -- while also complaining that the two things were tied together.
It was a political masterstroke. Not only is it impossible for Republicans to say they're independent of Trump's demands, but there's now chaos and rebellion within their ranks.
TLDR; Americans won't vote, then yet still complain about the outcome.
More like many Americans actively vote against their own self interests then complain that the government doesn't look out for them. Kind of a 'leopard ate my face after I voted for the face eating leopard party' situation
I agree with you in some ways, but I don't think the "voting against their self-interests" argument is very strong.
My interests are higher taxes, finding public transportation and public healthcare. In their short-term simple view, I want higher taxes, so I'm the one voting against my self-interests. They live mostly in rural areas which public transportation doesn't serve at all.
Their interests are lower taxes and hating & doing bad things to people in the out-crowd. Again they only view short-term with a limited empathetic view. So they have no empathy for the out-crowd, until they find themselves or a loved one in the out-crowd. This the leopards eat faces, and we such on them for their lack of empathy giving them their due.
I wish we could open their mind to greater empathy and to be more future-thinking, but their brains are broken, I think.
This bill was shit and we should be glad it's dead
War hawks cope and seethe
Ukraine is a bulwark against Russian aggression. If it falls, Russia will be emboldened to bully other countries with impunity. That isn't being a war hawk - it's defending the status quo and its benefits.
Why should we send 74 billion in aid to Israel and Ukraine when 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, we are the only OECD nation without some form of universal healthcare, and over 650,000 Americans are homeless (a 12 percent increase during 2023). Do you honestly believe that there is a higher priority to send obscenely large sums of money in the form of aid to other countries rather than focusing on the material issues we face as a nation?
Unless you want to house people in tanks or feed them RPGs, this money was never going to help them in the first place. We don't ship over pallets of $100 bills, we send them munitions that are going to expire soon and will need replacing.
This is such a low effort response that showcases US apathy for it's own poverty conditions. Of the $75.4 billion sent to Ukraine alone, only $26.4 billion was financial (loans, funds, other financial support), and on top of that only $2.7 billion is used for humanitarian purposes like food, healthcare, etc). The remaining $46.3 billion is reflected as military spending towards weapons and equipment, security training, grants and loans for weapons, etc, all of which is covered from our $800 billion dollar "defense" budget.
So now that we've addressed your concerns about how tax dollars fund military spending, I ask again, do you honestly believe that there is a higher priority to spend large sums of money in the form of aid to other countries rather than focusing on the material issues we face as a nation?
How is the status quo benefiting anyone? The lines aren't moving, soldiers and civilians are dying daily.
And yes, you are still a war hawk if you support the status quo of war to continue.
IMO Ukraine should be admitted to NATO after negotiating a peace treaty.
I agree with the Israel part.
Russia needs to learn the hard way not to start ground wars in europe
I'd argue they already did and yeah fuck Putin but we should be questioning whether it is morally right to support a stalemate that is killing a whole generation of Ukrainian men. We should absolutely be questioning how it is the American's responsibility to support that indefinitely with taxes when we are so insanely in debt. How are any of these carve-outs appropriate in an "Immigration" bill?
Strangely, a lot of the military support we give to other countries is basically free. We maintain a vast stockpile of munitions that all have an expiration date. A lot of these billions going to our allies would just go to a very expensive landfill otherwise. I don't know to what extent that was true in these cases.
Furthermore, I think giving Ukrainians the means to defend their country, even dying to do so, is preferable to allowing Russia to slow-genocide them like Israel is doing to Palestinians. It's not our "responsibility" to get involved, but it is in our best interest to oppose Putin.
To your last point, it has nothing to do with immigration, but that was the deal Republicans demanded.