***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[RustyShackleford]

Some of y'all are way too old to get your daily news from Charlamagne and DJ Envy.

I talk politics with a lot of my friends, they like talking to me best I make an effort for them to think I am not overtly judging them or being too harsh. Especially because most know I am really in to it.

But nothing sends a shape pain to my heart quicker than someone sending me a link regarding politics and it Joe Rogan, Umar Johnson, Tariq Nasheed or Lord Jamar.

I always gotta have this gif on deck to send back at them...

 

[gry60]

In regards to the Joe Manchin discussion:

I can sort of see osh kosh bosh 's point about Joe trying to be the bipartisan voice. Thanks to the leaked audio of his negotiations with Republican kingmakers, we know he knows he will look foolish if he fails to get something out of Republicans.

The thing is, McConnell knows Manchin cares a lot about a bipartisan deal, and he's going to (well, he can) use it to push Democrats to amend their bill so that it's as close as possible to what a normal conservative party would vote for (watch McTurtle pledge his support for a bill that only includes mandatory voter ID, with no definition on what that should be). When Democrats finally agree to something that compromises their promises (to the detriment of their base), the GOP can overwhelmingly vote against it and voila! They get a bill they like (which they can use against Democrats) and the benefit of not having voted for it (which they'll use to promote themselves on the campaign trail.

What do Democrats get out of negotiating themselves towards the GOP's position? Nothing: it's not popular, especially not among their base, and they can't campaign on that and promise more.

Does Manchin realize this? Maybe, maybe not. Does he care about Democrats winning elections and retaining power in Congress? Depends on how far he's willing to negotiate with himself before his foolishness starts bothering him.

 

[IATT]

 

[junglejim]

No.

I made a comment on the rhetoric that surrounded the confirmation hearings of the Justices that former-President Trump appointed.

I wonder if that sort of rhetoric about pending cases, and the decisions that the nominated SCOTUS Justices will make, will change in light of this decision.

on the same day they also held that corporations can basically use child slaves as much as they want and that certain adoption agencies can discriminate against LBGTQ people

 

[IATT]

 

[RustyShackleford]

In regards to the Joe Manchin discussion:

I can sort of see osh kosh bosh 's point about Joe trying to be the bipartisan voice. Thanks to the leaked audio of his negotiations with Republican kingmakers, we know he knows he will look foolish if he fails to get something out of Republicans.

The thing is, McConnell knows Manchin cares a lot about a bipartisan deal, and he's going to (well, he can) use it to push Democrats to amend their bill so that it's as close as possible to what a normal conservative party would vote for (watch McTurtle pledge his support for a bill that only includes mandatory voter ID, with no definition on what that should be). When Democrats finally agree to something that compromises their promises (to the detriment of their base), the GOP can overwhelmingly vote against it and voila! They get a bill they like (which they can use against Democrats) and the benefit of not having voted for it (which they'll use to promote themselves on the campaign trail.

What do Democrats get out of negotiating themselves towards the GOP's position? Nothing: it's not popular, especially not among their base, and they can't campaign on that and promise more.

Does Manchin realize this? Maybe, maybe not. Does he care about Democrats winning elections and retaining power in Congress? Depends on how far he's willing to negotiate with himself before his foolishness starts bothering him.

Dude that was not Osh's point. I accepted Manchin is trying to make a deal, I am taking with doing it in the dumbest way possible, throwing his caucus under the bus while doing it, and dooming the country because of his buffoonery.

However, it is gonna be his point when he comes back in here a moves the goal post to it to act like people are just being unreasonable, but dude was trying to claim Dems pursued a strategy that they had not, and when that didn't line up with reality he moved onto acting people are being unreasonable for taking issue with Macnhin's nonsense.

Dude just starts with a "Dems did something wrong by listening to progressives" position and works backward from there. And if point out the flaws in his arguments, he acts like you are being unreasonable

 

[dwalk31]

on the same day they also held that corporations can basically use child slaves as much as they want and that certain adoption agencies can discriminate against LBGTQ people

The first opinion you’re talking about was 8-1.

The second opinion you’re talking about was unanimous.

I’m not sure this makes the point that you might think it does.

 

[IATT]

 

[Based Jesus]

The thing is Manchin doesn't need to make a deal, he's actively choosing to force dems into needing republican votes

 

[Based Jesus]

They're gonna find out RustyShackleford voted 4 times

Twice for Chris Paul and twice for Devin Booker

 

[RustyShackleford]

They're gonna find out RustyShackleford voted 4 times

Twice for Chris Paul and twice for Devin Booker

Blessed Kendall with a vote too

 

[Jpdedc14]

Bipartisanship shouldn't be needed. West Virginia didn't elect Manchin to be a Republican, otherwise they would have voted for Morissey.
Who is going to look back in 2024 and say "well at least Manchin kept the senate gridlocked"? Even if not all West Virginians agree with his votes, if he feels Dems are the right party to be with, vote like it. Otherwise you're admitting you only joined the party because it was popular at the time.


Republicans stole 2 SCOTUS' seats from you dudes, and Manchin is gonna avenge this by asking McConnell if he's okay with these bills?

Goes for Sinema, too. Arizona voted for the purple haired libbie, not this centrist do nothing.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Dude that was not Osh's point. I accepted Manchin is trying to make a deal, I am taking with doing it in the dumbest way possible, throwing his caucus under the bus while doing it, and dooming the country because of his buffoonery.

However, it is gonna be his point when he comes back in here a moves the goal post to it to act like people are just being unreasonable, but dude was trying to claim Dems pursued a strategy that they had not, and when that didn't line up with reality he moved onto acting people are being unreasonable for taking issue with Macnhin's nonsense.

Dude just starts with a "Dems did something wrong by listening to progressives" position and works backward from there. And if point out the flaws in his arguments, he acts like you are being unreasonable

I said democrats should work harder to get Joe Manchin's vote.
there has been no moving of the goal posts.

If you think HR1 is the best they could do on that front okay fine, I disagree, but i did not move any goalposts.



You're feelings are your own, if you want to be angry at Joe Manchin, im not stopping you.
Be mad at him. I can see why you would, it's very very frustrating.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

we know Manchin

- has a fetish for bipartisanship
- is a bit of a grandstander
- is in an R +30 state.


all im saying is they should have put something in HR1 that would appeal to these facts about him.
and I would not go on cable news and intimate he's bought and sold by the kochs or is "the new mitch McConnel"

people have a right to their feelings, but imo I think it's unwise.

 

[dinyc3st]

Basically saying this ***** is crazy

 

[RustyShackleford]

I said democrats should work harder to get Joe Manchin's vote.
there has been no moving of the goal posts.

If you think HR1 is the best they could do on that front okay fine, I disagree, but i did not move any goalposts.



You're feelings are your own, if you want to be angry at Joe Manchin, im not stopping you.
Be mad at him. I can see why you would, it's very very frustrating.

You original objection is the Dems played it wrong, seemingly by pressuring Manchin. You said you were joking but the racist thing yet you still said this...

hindsight is 20/20 but prob should have started with this instead of the

pass HR1 and call joe manchin a racist until he votes for it strategy

This clearly implies you have an issue with how the Dems played this. You went on to say...

because it's Joe Manchin? If the house wants to do that fine I guess, but Chuck Schumer should have played this better instead of forcing that vote.

But no vote has happened. All Schumer did is say there would be a vote on the Senate bill before this session ends. It ends on the 28th of this month from my understanding. Today with Manchin in attendance he said he would schedule the procedural vote to move it forward. Manchin had weeks upon weeks of heads up in which no one in party leadership pressured him publicly in any way. So what, the Dems are supposed to mind-read Joe Manchin to stop him from constantly blindsiding them?

The Dem leadership, the people writing the bill, didn't try to force Manchin's hand or throw him under the bus. At most all Schumer said it he wanted to bring GOP oppression to the light by having votes on these bills.

That is the goal post-move: Yesterday it was Dems played it wrong because they pressured Manchin. Today is they played it wrong because they didn't write a bill to appeal to Joe Manchin (like they could even predict what that fool wants).

HR.1 has is the House revision of the For the People Act. S.1 is the Senate version, so what is included in HR.1 doesn't even really affect Manchin because whatever end up in S.1 is what is getting passed as the final bill and Manchin has been given tons of time to work with Schumer on the Senate version of the bill.

So now your grievance with the Dems and people mad with Manchin depends on us ignoring how bills are written and passed.

we know Manchin

- has a fetish for bipartisanship
- is a bit of a grandstander
- is in an R +30 state.


all im saying is they should have put something in HR1 that would appeal to these facts about him.
and I would not go on cable news and intimate he's bought and sold by the kochs or is "the new mitch McConnel"

people have a right to their feelings, but imo I think it's unwise.

Which member of the Democratic Party's leadership is doing this, who in this discussion advocated for the Dems doing this?

Please give an example, otherwise, you are just arguing against strawmen

 

[blastercombo]

Bipartisanship only works in theory. In current practice it’s a reach at best. Republicans act in both bad faith and reactionary. Afraid Texas might go blue? Make it so it’s harder to vote. Dems want gun laws? Oh, let’s take them all away.

problem is, dems are punk as ****. They finally hit blackjack but are still asking for more cards

 

[IATT]

Bipartisanship only works in theory. In current practice it’s a reach at best. Republicans can in both bad faith and reactionary. Afraid Texas might go blue? Make it so it’s harder to vote. Dems want gun laws? Oh, let’s take them all away.

problem is, dems are punk as ****. They finally hit blackjack but are still asking for more cards

nah, it’s like they got a pair of 8s or two aces and scared to split

actually it’s definitely the pair of aces

 

[blastercombo]

nah, it’s like they got a pair of 8s or two aces and scared to split

actually it’s definitely the pair of aces

I’d disagree only because they already have the winning hand. They’re just actively and knowingly ****ing it up

 

[TooOlfForThisIsh]

we know Manchin

- has a fetish for bipartisanship
- is a bit of a grandstander
- is in an R +30 state.


all im saying is they should have put something in HR1 that would appeal to these facts about him.
and I would not go on cable news and intimate he's bought and sold by the kochs or is "the new mitch McConnel"

people have a right to their feelings, but imo I think it's unwise.

When I was younger I’d date women who would get mad at me, and then get even more mad at me when I asked what was wrong. Eventually I realized that I shouldn’t put up with that.

Since Manchin is such a believer in Congressional tradition, you’d think that any reasonable differences could be worked out in reconciliation, right? Isn’t the next step for the Senate to pass a bill? Why would the hose immediately jump the process? That doesn’t seem like it honors the institution and it’s practices.

 

[Nike Jordan]

Basically saying this ***** is crazy

 

[blastercombo]

In what way is it lame? What does that even mean? ship her to Alabama and let’s find out just how much “her people” accept her.

 

[gry60]

Basically saying this ***** is crazy

Did she return the money she got from that racial discrimination lawsuit yet?

 

[p0tat0 5alad]

In what way is it lame? What does that even mean? ship her to Alabama and let’s find out just how much “her people” accept her.

We don't want her

 

[dinyc3st]

I’d disagree only because they already have the winning hand. They’re just actively and knowingly ****ing it up

16 doesn’t beat 17-21