***Official Political Discussion Thread***

be honest, do you really think this HR1 thing has been well calibrated to get Joe Manchins vote?
How the **** are the Dems suppose to even calibrate it when Manchin doesn't tell them his problem with the bill? You want to be a right-leaning centrist, fine, you want protect you brand, fine. But Manchin takes his nonsense beyond the point of what is reasonable caucus politics.

HR1 is having issues in the House with moderates too, but those reps have been telling Pelosi their issues for months now. Manchin had years, he didn't tell them. There was a hearing, he didn't tell them. Schumer said he scheduled a vote, he did not tell him. He blindsided them with an op-ed, then waited 10 days to send his new demands.

Seems like you are so concerned with criticizing the Dems for listening to progressives that you refuse to even acknowledge that tactical choices that made this situation a **** show were done by Joe Manchin.

Joe Manchin is very very wrong about this whole filibuster thing,
he could switch parties tomorrow and be republican senator for life in west virginia if that's what you'd all prefer.

so whatever his level of racism is, it's clearly it's not so high that you can't persuade him.
otherwise he'd just become a republican.
Miss me with this snark. :lol:

No one wants control of the Senate to go back to McConnell but this is some next-level nonsense to act like people on a discussion forum can't voice their displeasure at a delusional white racist putting democracy in danger.

Democrat or not.

No one is saying or has said the Dems shouldn't try to get Manchin's vote. If they can include mandating alternative forms or ID everyone has, make states accept college IDs, or include a way for people to get a freely available national ID, then I can live with that demand. I want them to ask him to back off making it easier for states to purge voters' rolls though. But it is the Dems job to try to get something done, and I am fine with them trying.

It isn't my job though.

So please spare me these arguments and comments that since Manchin is the 50th vote that I or anyone else in here should just be accepting of his ****ery.
 
Last edited:

Yang was so flippant with this comment it is disgusting

While I haven't watched the full video for context I read they were talking about homelessness when he made that comment. They were talking about how to decrease homelessness and people having to live in the streets and instead of talking about his affordable housing plan (which is to be best in the field) or shelters, mans just decided to talk a **** on people with mental illness.

What a Jackass.

If he doesn't win his political career might be over. If he finishes lower than 2nd, it is definitely over.
 
Last edited:

My uncle put me onto this trick and I did it a couple of times with great success. Memorized the I Have Dream Speech, so when white people bring up MLK and the finals lines of the speech, about living in racial harmony. Ask them if they agree with everything he said in that speech. They say yes, then I recite other parts like this back to them...

But 100 years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself in exile in his own land

Always get the same reaction from white folk...
giphy.gif
 
Whoa, Cavanaugh and Barret voted for the ACA. Weren't they put in to vote against it lol
 

Trump somewhere upset…..
 
Whoa, Cavanaugh and Barret voted for the ACA. Weren't they put in to vote against it lol
Seems like since the decision was based on the plaintiff not being able to prove they suffered and damages from the mandate being zeroed out, it was an easy decision to make

I would hope conservatives give it up, but from what I read since there was not a ruling on the constitutionality of the mandate, it leaves the door open for them to try again.

I might be wrong though. Only read the NYT alert
 
I wonder if this will alter the rhetoric surrounding SCOTUS appointments moving forward.
This is shoddy lawyering (at best) on your behalf. They struck it down on standing and punted making an actual decision on whether it could stand without the individual mandate. You’re either trolling, not attempting to make any good analysis, or just being yourself which is usually all of the above.
 
Back
Top Bottom