not that I disagree with your frustrations but the difference is the Dems voted for the 1800 + zero Cons voted for the 1400 the GOP were solidly Anti-Relief at the end.
i mean if the argument is people are dumb sure great cosign but if we're actually addressing the material benefits its a different conversation
Let’s not pretend that the Republicans wanted the direct payments, either. The only reason why they happened was Trump getting co-opted by loving the idea of having people get money on a check signed by him.
Good point, and also totally different circumstance. The first was voted on when the "stock market" had tanked, people were being laid off left and right, people's seats in congress were on the line still, and the light at the end of the tunnel didn't exist.
the hope is this juices the economy, at least until 2022. Combined with competent governance with regard to covid. then getting Manchin to lower the vote threshold to 55 votes for an Infrastructure/Jobs package.
Yes, let's proud of ourselves that they did more than the GOP but ignore the morons that didn't allow it to live up to it's potential Low bar
manchin sucks, but we already knew that. We knew it for a long time. Like I said people are acting like the Dems had a huge majority and couldn’t get it over the line.
This story is infuriating. The greed, corruption and sheer incompetence to let this happen. some important details in the Twitter thread for those that don’t have the NYT
There are many hilarious things about this, but the Tucker quote that as surely a throw away line on his show is amazing. That's the best blurb you could get?
they started this whole process by going back on the 2k checks. i mean i will take the 1400 but they set the negotiation low before anything even started
I just skimmed it, but a company that makes anthrax vaccine(s) found a niche in the funding that also supports the national stockpile. Other companies got squeezed out of making ppe for the stockpile as a result. The anthrax fears are from >10 years ago, and the persistence of the fears is maybe not based on solid science. The company keeps telling the govt. that it can't survive in the public arena, so the govt. keeps giving them more and more money.
My take in general is that this is The Bill. You and I both know that we have a fundamentally broken anti-demcratic chamber and its idiotic procedural rules will be exploited to delay or kill every other meaningful piece of legislation going forward until 2022. I assume America will be fighting communists yet again in that election Maybe, MAYBE the Democrats get to appoint someone who doesn't think corporate and union politocal spending is similar to the Supreme Court
It is a pretty sad commentary on the political system of a country with this level of wealth that the guy in charge, who essentially was a dog chasing cars, got us to the point you're talking about
Talk about some hellscape incrementalism. We just had veritable white nationalists and right wing terror sympathizers in the admin, saw behind the curtain as the whole of the gop aligned with foreign adversaries, watched that same party nearly topple a democratic election as they push to suppress more voters, etc. Gee maybe we can lower the threshold to 55 in 2022! Thanks for saving the country Joe Manchin! America would submerge into Mao communism if dems passed their popular agenda today, but if we can win Alaska and Florida it’s totes ok.
Senator Chuck Grassley is entering his 37th straight hour regaling CSPAN watchers with pidgin tales in an effort to block the confirmation of the Deputy Director of Policy at some no name agency.
The dynamics of a talking filibuster also change the political calculation. It basically forces you to only use it as last resort on something you think you win the politics of. Vs now where it's a procedural veto with no optics to worry about for the minority It's why if this is the solution it happens on the John Lewis voting rights act. Sterling popularity for the bill and the man.
Some of the takes from Cruz, Hawley et al having to come up with talking points for hours at a time would be worth the rule change alone.
The rule changes talked about also include needing 40 members on the floor to maintain the filibuster vs the onus being on the majority needing 60 to continue business. Good luck doing that very often or consistently.
I realize it’s politics but these mfers who are their moderates saying we’re sending stimulus to undocumented workers, they say illegals, is pissing me the fuck off
Right and the clips of them debating against some of the things they will be against will be more formally on the record, with accompanying video.
Finished this book a couple weeks ago. It’s a short informative history of the filibuster and why it needs to go. I reccomend it if you’re interested in the topic. it’s also another book that makes you so frustrated. It highlights a bunch of different times where we were so close to not fucking it up, then made a seemingly innocuous decision that had devastating consequences down the road
I'm 100% for making it a talking filibuster where you have to stay on point (this is what Wendy Davis had to do) and only you can continue it.