I Don't Know If Joe Can Do It

[fskimospy]

Still, I would be incredibly cautious at this point.

They give AoC literally a 60-second recording - and she is basically a lead for the new progressive movement. They are really TRYING to keep their progressive candidates in the basement like a bastard child and refuses to really address their issues.

I mean, for christ sakes, 87% of Democrats support Medicare for All, and you can't even get a candidate that is in favor of that?

What could have saved him a bit though is if his VP pick was more progressive with the likes of Bernie or Warren in an attempt to appease those voters.. Instead he went the opposite way with another cookie cutter centrist that loves putting citizens in jail for petty crimes. Such a shame.


All I'm saying is.... a lot of people in your base aren't exactly going to be fired up to get out and vote during a pandemic.... and with Biden up at the mound, it isn't going to excite people much from getting up from their 6 moths of Netflix n' chill.

1) Kamala Harris has the second most liberal voting record in the Senate. Saying she is a cookie cutter centrist is a denial of reality.

2) Trump has already succeeded in firing up the Democratic base like never before.

3) The idea that the Democrats should have some sort of super progressive convention would work against the advantage and the entire reason the party electorate chose Biden to begin with. They did so because of his appeal to centrists and center-right people. Throwing that away would be dumb.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

And we need to note the very real probability that even with a Biden win and a sweep of the House and Senate Democrats will likely have two years to govern before the GOP wins one or both houses back. They have to be pedal to the floor the whole time.

It always makes me wonder - because anyone can predict these election turnouts most of the time... Why exactly don't they have sets of reps, ready to throw down already-crafted bills so they can quickly pass them the moment they get into office?

You would think they would have bills lined up for all of the following:
1) Improving healthcare (be it medicare for all, public option, etc)
2) Tax reform - close loopholes, increase taxes
3) Green new deal junk (tax benefits, etc.)
4) Infrastructure bill
5) Social security bill

Are reps just really that fucking lazy?

Just like with the Obama days, the most they could squeeze out was a turd bill for health-care reform based on a previous red-state version of how to do healthcare lol.

 

[Brainonska511]

1) Kamala Harris has the second most liberal voting record in the Senate. Saying she is a cookie cutter centrist is a denial of reality.

2) Trump has already succeeded in firing up the Democratic base like never before.

3) The idea that the Democrats should have some sort of super progressive convention would work against the advantage and the entire reason the party electorate chose Biden to begin with. They did so because of his appeal to centrists and center-right people. Throwing that away would be dumb.

Some people think that Rose Twitter is reflective of real life

 

[UNCjigga]

Looks like the Trump camp is branding the Dems’ ticket as “Joe and the Hoe”. I hear it tests real well with their target demographic of white college-educated suburban housewives.

 

[Grey_Beard]

All I'm saying is.... a lot of people in your base aren't exactly going to be fired up to get out and vote during a pandemic.... and with Biden up at the mound, it isn't going to excite people much from getting up from their 6 moths of Netflix n' chill.

Then why is voter enthusiasm at an all time high?

Voter Enthusiasm for Biden Soars 20 Points Since March, Poll Shows

Forty-eight percent of Biden supporters said they were very enthusiastic about voting for him, up from 28 percent in March.

www.newsweek.com

Election advantage stays with Biden; enthusiasm deficit eases, but remains: POLL

A welcome reception for Sen. Kamala Harris and rising enthusiasm for Joe Biden mark President Donald Trump's challenges in the 2020 election, as do two realities on the ground: just 14% of Americans in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll say the coronavirus pandemic is under control, and...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Grey_Beard]

It always makes me wonder - because anyone can predict these election turnouts most of the time... Why exactly don't they have sets of reps, ready to throw down already-crafted bills so they can quickly pass them the moment they get into office?

You would think they would have bills lined up for all of the following:
1) Improving healthcare (be it medicare for all, public option, etc)
2) Tax reform - close loopholes, increase taxes
3) Green new deal junk (tax benefits, etc.)
4) Infrastructure bill
5) Social security bill

Are reps just really that fucking lazy?

Just like with the Obama days, the most they could squeeze out was a turd bill for health-care reform based on a previous red-state version of how to do healthcare lol.

Because most of these are sitting on Moscow Mitch’s desk. There are over 300 bills that are held up in the Senate. Are you delusional?

 

[fskimospy]

It always makes me wonder - because anyone can predict these election turnouts most of the time... Why exactly don't they have sets of reps, ready to throw down already-crafted bills so they can quickly pass them the moment they get into office?

You would think they would have bills lined up for all of the following:
1) Improving healthcare (be it medicare for all, public option, etc)
2) Tax reform - close loopholes, increase taxes
3) Green new deal junk (tax benefits, etc.)
4) Infrastructure bill
5) Social security bill

Are reps just really that fucking lazy?

Just like with the Obama days, the most they could squeeze out was a turd bill for health-care reform based on a previous red-state version of how to do healthcare lol.

In lots of cases they do have ready to go bills for simpler stuff but there's no off the shelf bill you're going to use to reorganize 1/5th of the US economy. I would imagine some sort of medicare for all or public option bill is ready to go - in fact I bet a bill that does as much as at least already been introduced in the House.

As for the Obama days, those first two years were some of the most productive in decades. They passed a huge stimulus bill, a huge financial regulation bill, and a huge health care bill. They did a lot!

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Because most of these are sitting on Moscow Mitch’s desk. There are over 300 bills that are held up in the Senate. Are you delusional?

lol you're funny and entirely missed the point.

Let's see how fast they pass large-scale items like the ones I mentioned when/if they takeover in January.

 

[fskimospy]

lol you're funny and entirely missed the point.

Let's see how fast they pass large-scale items like the ones I mentioned when/if they takeover in January.

How fast do you think they should pass them?

 

[Jhhnn]

Still, I would be incredibly cautious at this point.

They give AoC literally a 60-second recording - and she is basically a lead for the new progressive movement. They are really TRYING to keep their progressive candidates in the basement like a bastard child and refuses to really address their issues.

I mean, for christ sakes, 87% of Democrats support Medicare for All, and you can't even get a candidate that is in favor of that?

What could have saved him a bit though is if his VP pick was more progressive with the likes of Bernie or Warren in an attempt to appease those voters.. Instead he went the opposite way with another cookie cutter centrist that loves putting citizens in jail for petty crimes. Such a shame.


All I'm saying is.... a lot of people in your base aren't exactly going to be fired up to get out and vote during a pandemic.... and with Biden up at the mound, it isn't going to excite people much from getting up from their 6 moths of Netflix n' chill.

Blah, blah, blah. Dems are fired up to kick Trump's ass if we can. We'll be there. And we'll be joined by a lot of people who realize they got chumped the first time they voted for Trump.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

How fast do you think they should pass them?

Like I said, if you have bills crafted - which you should if you keep pushing for them - then within the first 6 months you should have massive reforms all-around.

Just see how long it takes for them to even mention something like tax reform.

 

[woolfe9998]

And we need to note the very real probability that even with a Biden win and a sweep of the House and Senate Democrats will likely have two years to govern before the GOP wins one or both houses back. They have to be pedal to the floor the whole time.

Absolutely. I would start off with healthcare. Fix ACA in relation to its original deficiencies and GOP dismemberment of it, lower Medicare age to 60, Medicare can negotiate prescription drug prices, and sell Medicare to those who haven't aged in. And make these policies take effect immediately, not staggered out like with the original ACA. Why? Because it will be enormously popular and will help in midterm elections.

Another top priority is voting rights. We need to either modify the Voting Rights Act or pass a new one. GOP voter suppression must end.

I'm in more of a quandary about what to do with energy policy in the short term. Do they pass a bill which will help but is neutered, or go full bore right off? My main concern is that what we need to do to combat climate change, if we're really going to go as far as needed, won't be politically popular in the short term.

 

[K1052]

For the democrats to pass any of their agenda they're going to have to engineer the scuttling of the filibuster first. Passing HR1 again would probably do it. Then they can go wild.

 

[K1052]

I'm in more of a quandary about what to do with energy policy in the short term. Do they pass a bill which will help but is neutered, or go full bore right off? My main concern is that what we need to do to combat climate change, if we're really going to go as far as needed, won't be politically popular in the short term.

Extending/expanding the clean energy tax breaks would probably be fastest including lifting the limits on EV credits and adding energy storage. A larger environmental package would likely come later.

 

[woolfe9998]

Still, I would be incredibly cautious at this point.

They give AoC literally a 60-second recording - and she is basically a lead for the new progressive movement. They are really TRYING to keep their progressive candidates in the basement like a bastard child and refuses to really address their issues.

I mean, for christ sakes, 87% of Democrats support Medicare for All, and you can't even get a candidate that is in favor of that?

What could have saved him a bit though is if his VP pick was more progressive with the likes of Bernie or Warren in an attempt to appease those voters.. Instead he went the opposite way with another cookie cutter centrist that loves putting citizens in jail for petty crimes. Such a shame.


All I'm saying is.... a lot of people in your base aren't exactly going to be fired up to get out and vote during a pandemic.... and with Biden up at the mound, it isn't going to excite people much from getting up from their 6 moths of Netflix n' chill.

Yet Sanders himself was given a lot more than one minute.

AOC got 60 seconds because she is appearing at a convention inevitably bound by vote to nominate Joe Biden, and the purpose of her appearance was to second the nomination of Bernie Sanders. Making her irrelevant at best. She could be every bit as progressive as she is, and if she wanted to make a speech like Sanders, where she says she supports Biden in spite of her differences on policy, she'd probably get more time.

The dems aren't interested in suppressing policies of the progressive wing or their advocates. They are more interested in unity around the candidate who primary voters have already chosen.

 

[Grey_Beard]

lol you're funny and entirely missed the point.

Let's see how fast they pass large-scale items like the ones I mentioned when/if they takeover in January.

Do you think the Democrats are like the Republicons who had a dizzying number of bills to repeal the ACA but then failed to do anything in the two years they controlled all three legs of Washington?

I am sure many who vote for these “reforms” will be voted out in two years as many claim harm like with the ACA and the people saying “Don’t socialize my Medicare,” “You can keep your doctor (like anyone other the the insurance companies to make that decision regardless of how reckless you thought that statement was),” or “Death panels!” Instead it will be “The best bridge is a falling one,” “Why do I want a living wage when I can live off the government,” and best one “The tax increases will shut down the economy and stop the trickle down economics!” I cannot wait for the protests with camouflage, bullet proof vests, guns and no police around for these. Fools will vote for this and call the white people with automatic weapons, camouflage and Kevlar vests “peaceful protests.”

 

[woolfe9998]

Extending/expanding the clean energy tax breaks would probably be fastest including lifting the limits on EV credits and adding energy storage. A larger environmental package would likely come later.

Yes, but if they get a good enough Senate majority and really do end the filibuster, they can pass the whole package straight away. If you're saying they shouldn't do that because it won't play well with voters, you may be right. That is what I'm in a quandary about. Because the counter-argument is that if we pass a moderate bill only in order to not create electoral problems for the dems, what if they lose one or both houses in 2022 anyway? That would mean no further action can be taken for what could turn out to be another 10 years, which is unacceptable.

I can see both sides of this argument.

 

[Blackjack200]

1) Kamala Harris has the second most liberal voting record in the Senate.

lol

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/29/kamala-harriss-medicare-for-all-plan-keeps-private-insurance.html

 

[fskimospy]

Like I said, if you have bills crafted - which you should if you keep pushing for them - then within the first 6 months you should have massive reforms all-around.

Just see how long it takes for them to even mention something like tax reform.

So, broadly speaking you think they should have passed all those bills or at least most of them within 6 months? How would that be possible? There are some things they could probably pass quickly, and will, but to put it simply you’re missing the pretty obvious and huge problem that all Democrats don’t agree on them.

Even if Democrats take the Senate that means the tipping point senator is probably someone like Joe Manchin. What do you think his ideas are on the green new deal? I’m going to take a wild stab and say he isn’t a big fan of quite a bit of it.

 

[Blackjack200]

The dems aren't interested in suppressing policies of the progressive wing or their advocates.

yeah they're definitely not suppressing M4A because of pressure from the healthcare lobby you fucking child.

 

[woolfe9998]

LBJ was a very powerful man in the USA before he became vice president, and then "inheriting" the presidency when JFK was shot dead. He had major experience as the senate majority leader from Texas, and was an extraordinarily powerful one at that, and very experienced in getting things done on the legislative floor. "Voting Rights Act, Civil Rights Act. Medicare, Medicaid." Those things are no small accomplishments on his tenure. And I believe the fact is that the US involvement in Vietnam was already underway before JFK was killed. I have not seen the case made that it was LBJ's doing and not JFK's that got us on that path.

--- Muse, launching his personal Seti Project, searching for high intelligence in the Milky Way.

76 days until the big one! Vote... vote early, vote Democratic!

Yes, but LBJ had no qualities that anyone would associate with great leadership. He showed little passion in addressing the nation. Like you said, he had connections in Congress, had the right cultural context in place, and had the willingness to bully and blackmail to get the votes he needed. He got it done by being a consummate political apparatchik at the right place and time.

That's why the entire issue of presidential accomplishment is a lot more complicated than Starbuck's simplistic formulation of "visionary" and "leadership." Because it requires a certain context, and certain skills which may be perfect at one time and place, and absolutely wrong in another.

 

[K1052]

what if they lose one or both houses in 2022 anyway?

Were I in the leadership I'd pass legislation admitting all US territories and DC (minus the Federal enclave) and float the size of the US House on a population formula ensuring it about doubles which would restore its original mandate.

 

[fskimospy]

Absolutely. I would start off with healthcare. Fix ACA in relation to its original deficiencies and GOP dismemberment of it, lower Medicare age to 60, Medicare can negotiate prescription drug prices, and sell Medicare to those who haven't aged in. And make these policies take effect immediately, not staggered out like with the original ACA. Why? Because it will be enormously popular and will help in midterm elections.

Another top priority is voting rights. We need to either modify the Voting Rights Act or pass a new one. GOP voter suppression must end.

I'm in more of a quandary about what to do with energy policy in the short term. Do they pass a bill which will help but is neutered, or go full bore right off? My main concern is that what we need to do to combat climate change, if we're really going to go as far as needed, won't be politically popular in the short term.

I think they should act with the assumption they will lose unified control of government and basically do what they think is right, regardless of the electoral consequences. In the US it is far easier to obstruct than to get something done so if you have a chance you should do it, and do as much as you can.

There is no way any electoral defeat, no matter how massive, leads to a veto proof majority for Republicans so you have at least 4 years for your policies to take root.

 

[woolfe9998]

yeah they're definitely not suppressing M4A because of pressure from the healthcare lobby you fucking child.

Being called a child by someone who is completely out of touch with political reality is a hoot. I'll take criticism any time from one who has said that Trump is no worse than Biden but for being a little rude. So thanks for that.

 

[fskimospy]

Yes, but LBJ had no qualities that anyone would associate with great leadership. He showed little passion in addressing the nation. Like you said, he had connections in Congress, had the right cultural context in place, and had the willingness to bully and blackmail to get the votes he needed. He got it done by being a consummate political apparatchik at the right place and time.

That's why the entire issue of presidential accomplishment is a lot more complicated than Starbuck's simplistic formulation of "visionary" and "leadership." Because it requires a certain context, and certain skills which may be perfect at one time and place, and absolutely wrong in another.

Also, he had effective ways to threaten people. Exactly what threat could Obama have used against Republicans that would have been effective? Absolutely nothing - he had nothing they wanted and he couldn’t threaten their seats.

I would love to hear of an example of arm twisting that would have worked.