Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

 

 

Another shining moment for our self-appointed moral conscience, who can roll in his wads of cash as Democrats lose the House and Senate. If they do hold on, it sure as hell isn't because of him, or his partner in purity from Arizona. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6817

  • DRW50

    5991

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3465

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

 

I included the second tweet because I pretty much agree with it. And this on top of cutting unemployment benefits. All so we can get a round of backpatting over fiscal conservatism. This is really a lousy idea that is going to drown out much of the popular support this bill could have had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's Manchin for you. But while I don't agree with cutting the income level and that will affect some, I don't think that many of the general public will notice any of this skullduggery much. What trends on Twitter for a few hours is not what drowns out public discourse. And they're not cutting UI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Unfortunately due to the wave of voter suppression laws being passed (and, again thanks to Manchin and Sinema, probably not going to be addressed by Congress), even these votes on the margins may be deciding.

 

I hope people will not punish the Democrats who did try, but I feel like all of these posturing games are leaving a lot of Democrats hanging out to dry, especially those like Raphael Warnock who campaigned on 2K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Dave Weigel lives in a world where he must choose between common sense and politely appeasing the deranged rantings of Brianha Joy Gray to prove he is left enough and often opts for Door #2, and thinks all Democratic voters do the same. But this is also coming from the same brain trust of folks who believed that if Pelosi and Schumer had just held a vote at 3 AM EST the day of the Capitol siege, Congressional GOP would've voted to impeach Trump.

 

It's not a small concession on lowering the limit, and I don't like it. But I do understand it, and I also don't trust in or take seriously either a) Twitter warriors of the left who view everything through a catastrophizing lens for Dems, either because of endless PTSD or because they simply want the party destroyed for not kowtowing to them, or b) Beltway pundits who live to handicap Dems at all costs and so always spin everything on behalf of the moderate or conservative voices in the caucus if not in the GOP itself. There is a more nuanced take than any of that, and I don't think any of this particular round of minutiae will have much bearing on '22 which will be tough no matter what.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The limit is going from $80,000 to $75,000. I thought it was 75 to begin with, so what is the POINT of dropping it. All it does is give the GOP a talking point. And it's not worth it.  

 

The idea of dropping the $400 unemployment supplement to $300 is also stupid. Again so little money sounds pointless.

 

If they got a commitment from Manchin on the filibuster in return for this so that they can pass HR1 then I'd get it.

 

 

EDIT: So sorry I got this mixed up. It zeros out at 80k. This is a even dumber move.

Edited by JaneAusten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

He's absolutely right, and this is something that has been pointed out and autopsied for years since Obamacare and those midterms, when gunshy Dems ran away from it. Though of course you'll have people tearing down the bill for not being perfect. Which is why more will be necessary.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm with you on this in fact they need to have a messaging campaign on this and NOT let the fascists drive the narrative. FDR used to have signage and messaging all over the CCC and WPA projects that were being worked on all over the country.  They should brand the American Recover Act and advertise. Sounds tacky but it is needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Absolutely! Brad should've simply moved on from Lunacy. There's no point of freeing her, if you're not going to at least make an attempt at redemption or incorporating her into the fold. It happened with Quinn, who committed quite a few felonies before become the Forrester Matriarch.  Heck, keep Lunacy in prison and have Poppy/Finn discover that she gave birth to twins - 'Sunny' could've come on with a clean slate and still had Sheila/Finn and all the other drama. It certainly couldn't have been worse than what we've witnessed with the destruction of $B.    
    • I would enjoy it if Swan popped up on BTG as an old one time friend/mentor of Anita’s for a cameo. This is just

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I had totally forgotten that Courtney story. I see Burton was already phoning it in by that point.
    • omg I completely missed that, but now when I see it typed here in your post, it's obvious icky cringe. So now I just checked and Tomas said that -- on May 27 that he likes the author Carl Ivati.  He said it with sort of an accent, so I didn't catch the stupid joke or think about the spelling.   I remember when that aired, that I actually said to myself at the time, "I wonder if that's a Latin American author, and I will have to google him later." And now I see your post, and I see. Well that's cringe, and I feel stupid to have fallen for it.

      Please register in order to view this content

         
    • There's a lot you don't need if you have the writing.  You don't even need large casts!  You could make do with a cast of 12-18 actors if the writing is there.
    • Thank you. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with sleeping around if your spouse actually knows about it. She’s just a cheating slut.
    • OMG...Robert Mandan! And Donna Mills is a child. I keep hoping for more of early Ross/Vanessa.
    • I get your point, but I also know that if the roles were reversed -- if a man were screwing around on a woman this way -- everyone would be all "All with his head!" When I say Vanessa needs therapy, I'm actually being kind, because I could begin and end with the fact that she's a cheating slut.
    • Is nobody going to mention the cringefest that is 'Carl Ivati'?
    • I've accepted we'll probably never see any of the Roger/Holly 1976-1978 storyline. Whenever any of Roger/Holly 1979 and 1980 storylines surface, those are must watch as they set in motion everything we saw a decade later.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy