This is why the Democrats cannot - will not - "negotiate"

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
Yes, it's from Mother Jones - a "liberal rag," but it really hits the nail on the head:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/10/john-boehner-cruzified-cross-tea

I understand that I'm writing from a partisan perspective and might be as blinkered as the next guy. But this strikes me as jaw-droppingly naive.

Here's the thing: I agree with our unnamed congressman about the device tax. It's a fairly small thing ($2-3 billion per year) and completely nonessential to Obamacare. It could be eliminated without harm, and it would give Boehner a small bit of face-saving that might allow him to pass a budget. If this had been the GOP's initial ask, Democrats probably would have given in.

But after weeks and weeks of tea party rage and intransigence, that became impossible. By the end of September, the Republican strategy had become crystal clear: demand unceasing concessions from Democrats at every opportunity without offering anything in return and without any negotiation. A month ago, Democrats might have shrugged over the device tax. Today, they know perfectly well what it would mean to let it go. It means that when the debt ceiling deadline comes up, there will be yet another demand. When the 6-week CR is up, there will be yet another. If and when appropriations bills are passed, there will be yet another. We've already seen the list. There simply won't be any end to the hostage taking. As their price for not blowing up the country, there will be an unending succession of short-term CRs and short-term debt limit extensions used as leverage for picking apart Obamacare—and everything else Democrats care about—piece by piece.

There's no way that any political party anywhere in the world would willingly put itself in this position. Does this mean that Democrats are "jamming" Boehner, leaving him no way to save some face? Yes it does, and human nature being what it is, that's truly unfortunate. But what other choice do they have? The newly Cruz-ified Republican Party has left them with no alternative.

Why on earth would anyone expect Democrats to "concede" anything under the current circumstances? Let me put this another way: If the situation were reversed, and Democrats were holding the Republican-controlled government hostage and demanding "concessions" on tax rates ("We want to raise the top marginal rate on the top 1% only 0.5%"), and in return the Democrats agreed to fund the government for six weeks (but wouldn't negotiate a full-year budget), do you think that Republicans would go along with that strategy?

Of course not.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Sounds good in theory but presumes Republicans will avoid letting the debt ceiling expire. The tea party and something like 43% of Americans are willing to do exactly that and implement the cuts that would require. 16% cut in mandatory spending is OK with me and it seems lots of other people.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
I've come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter at all and I mean none of it. We're going to take what we're told and there's nothing for it. Cooking forums are more rewarding. Adios.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
Sounds good in theory but presumes Republicans will avoid letting the debt ceiling expire. The tea party and something like 43% of Americans are willing to do exactly that and implement the cuts that would require. 16% cut in mandatory spending is OK with me and it seems lots of other people.

What sounds good? The article doesn't say anything except that the Democrats cannot possibly capitulate, given that Republicans will just demand more the next time. And the next time. Any thinking person knows it's true: you don't give in to blackmail, or the blackmailer will just ask for more.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Here are the details about what sort of spending cuts will be required if Democrats do refuse and debt ceiling is breached. Like I said earlier; go ahead Democrats, make my day.

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/ARTICLE/20131007/NEWS02/310079978?template=mobileart

Yep, it's that "burn it down!" attitude shared by all Teahadists.

They seem to think that they're fireproof, when only their billionaire backers stand to win anything. They're Chumps, Stooges & Patsies, but they'll have to be burning to figure it out.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
What sounds good? The article doesn't say anything except that the Democrats cannot possibly capitulate, given that Republicans will just demand more the next time. And the next time. Any thinking person knows it's true: you don't give in to blackmail, or the blackmailer will just ask for more.

Yep, because that worked so well last time with the sequester. Democrats refused to give in then also, and Republicans certainly didn't try that again, did they?

I have to admit though, this "refusing to capitulate" method locks in spending cuts so much easier than actually negotiating for them.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
85
91
Meanwhile, the U.S. Government purchases new airplanes from Italy for $50 million each... Only to have them go straight to the desert and be mothballed. So not only is the government wasting money on the C-27J they are still buying c-17 cargo planes that the Air Force d not want....yet the republicans are evil for trying to slow this insanity.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Meanwhile, the U.S. Government purchases new airplanes from Italy for $50 million each... Only to have them go straight to the desert and be mothballed. So not only is the government wasting money on the C-27J they are still buying c-17 cargo planes that the Air Force d not want....yet the republicans are evil for trying to slow this insanity.

You fail to illustrate that Repubs intend to stop this particular "insanity", at all. You also misrepresent the issue entirely.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/...tly-to-boneyard.html?comp=700001075741&rank=4
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
yet the republicans are evil for trying to slow this insanity.
All three parties suck mountains of @$$. The LP is equally evil to the RNC and the DNC.
Why on earth would anyone expect Democrats to "concede" anything under the current circumstances? Let me put this another way: If the situation were reversed, and Democrats were holding the Republican-controlled government hostage and demanding "concessions" on tax rates ("We want to raise the top marginal rate on the top 1% only 0.5%"), and in return the Democrats agreed to fund the government for six weeks (but wouldn't negotiate a full-year budget), do you think that Republicans would go along with that strategy? Of course not.
Mother Jones seems to fail to realize that Ted Cruz supported Bush not just in Y2k (when true conservatives supported Harry Brown and/or the late, great Howard Phillips), but also in '04 (when true libertarians/conservatives supported Michael Peroutka).

In other words, Ted Cruz would just be another Obamanation and a bunch of Bush shit if he became president just as any other Republican or running Libertarian Party candidate would. Ted Cruz is a warvangelical fiscal moderate (and Rand Paul is also a fiscal moderate) and I don't get why that is so hard for so many people to understand.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
Over half of the elected representatives of the citizens of this country are Republicans (278) vs. only (254) Democrats. Why do you feel that the Democrats shouldn't have to negotiate when they are in the minority?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,329
6,040
126
Over half of the elected representatives of the citizens of this country are Republicans (278) vs. only (254) Democrats. Why do you feel that the Democrats shouldn't have to negotiate when they are in the minority?

One reason might be that the American people what Obamacare by 86%. Don't bother to ask me to prove it to you. It involves scientific reasoning. I will not attempt to negotiate facts with you so you can avoid having to feel bad about not being able to actually reason where your ego is involved.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Over half of the elected representatives of the citizens of this country are Republicans (278) vs. only (254) Democrats. Why do you feel that the Democrats shouldn't have to negotiate when they are in the minority?

Dems have a majority in the Senate and the Executive, too. Dem HOR candidates also received more votes than Repubs in the 2012 election. Nor is it like the Teahad is the entirety of the Repub Party, either.

The extortion starts within the Repub Party, with extortion of their leaders. If Boehner allowed the issues to come to a vote, the Teahadists would lose, but so would he- the Speakership.

The implicit threat is that 43 Teahadists will exit the Party, leaving Dems with a plurality and therefore the Speakership.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Yep, because that worked so well last time with the sequester. Democrats refused to give in then also, and Republicans certainly didn't try that again, did they?

I have to admit though, this "refusing to capitulate" method locks in spending cuts so much easier than actually negotiating for them.

I love how completely childish you've become about this whole thing.

No matter what, the Democrats can't give in to blackmail as it only will make things worse. Sadly it may take a sharp lesson to teach Republicans the consequences of their ideology. I imagine the breach of the debt ceiling will be short as the stupid people who think it won't be a problem quickly learn how wrong they were, but it may come down to that. The sudden scramble will be funny except for the real consequences.

The good news about that is that just with the shutdown the Republicans are already tanking at the polls. Further foolishness of that may just be putting the House back in play for 2014 at which point we will be restoring that spending which was cut.

This reminds me of the skewed polls nonsense before the last election where Republicans convince themselves that all the people trying to teach them about reality are just part of some anti-conservative conspiracy. You would think they would have learned the last time.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
I love how completely childish you've become about this whole thing.

No matter what, the Democrats can't give in to blackmail as it only will make things worse. Sadly it may take a sharp lesson to teach Republicans the consequences of their ideology. I imagine the breach of the debt ceiling will be short as the stupid people who think it won't be a problem quickly learn how wrong they were, but it may come down to that. The sudden scramble will be funny except for the real consequences.

The good news about that is that just with the shutdown the Republicans are already tanking at the polls. Further foolishness of that may just be putting the House back in play for 2014 at which point we will be restoring that spending which was cut.

This reminds me of the skewed polls nonsense before the last election where Republicans convince themselves that all the people trying to teach them about reality are just part of some anti-conservative conspiracy. You would think they would have learned the last time.

Yep, I'm childish by pointing out the natural endgame to the OP position of "no negotiation." Not those saying the GOP is engaged in "hostage taking" or "Teahadists" or whatnot. I find it very interesting that you think "blackmail" about budget talks is worse than a 16% cut to mandatory spending. As for the "consequences of the ideology," I've already linked to them and I actually don't find them very objectionable. We'll see if the consequences you foresee come to pass; they certainly didn't with the sequester.
 
Last edited:

TheSiege

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2004
3,918
14
81
The GOP had the chance to negotiate on the bill when it was being drafted. Its a LAW now, there is no need to negotiate. It hasn't failed, and there is a good chance it won't. Spending is down and the deficit is lower. Republicans are making issues out of things that don't exist. Are they going to demand that we repeal the income tax law? Or the brady bill or some other arbitrary bill they disagree with, this isn't how a budget is formed. Obamacare is deficit neutral and possibly better for the deficit. Its time to build a bridge and get the fuck over it already.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
The GOP had the chance to negotiate on the bill when it was being drafted. Its a LAW now, there is no need to negotiate. It hasn't failed, and there is a good chance it won't. Spending is down and the deficit is lower. Republicans are making issues out of things that don't exist. Are they going to demand that we repeal the income tax law? Or the brady bill or some other arbitrary bill they disagree with, this isn't how a budget is formed. Obamacare is deficit neutral and possibly better for the deficit. Its time to build a bridge and get the fuck over it already.

You're right, the Obamacare law is drafted and passed into law. Now we're onto discussions about a different law, the budget. The Democrats and Obama have the chance to negotiate the budget now, and need to since the House has the Constitutional power of the purse. Or they can refuse to negotiate and continue on with the shutdown. And if they want to continue to refuse to negotiate, Obama can deal with having to reduce spending dramatically should the debt ceiling not be lifted.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
They seem to think that they're fireproof
1.jpg

2.jpg

3.jpg

4.jpg

5.jpg

52% of Republicans think we should refuse to extend the debt ceiling. Lowered spending can and would be used to deal with no future borrowing. Democrats are hoping for the inside straight, that public outrage would force the GOP to back down. In the meanwhile, spending cuts would go into effect. The "public outrage" tactic didn't work with the sequester, and I daresay it wouldn't work with the debt ceiling either. Reducing the deficit and paying down the debt always gets support from the American public.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/07/politics/debt-ceiling-debate/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
 

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
You're right, the Obamacare law is drafted and passed into law. Now we're onto discussions about a different law, the budget. The Democrats and Obama have the chance to negotiate the budget now, and need to since the House has the Constitutional power of the purse. Or they can refuse to negotiate and continue on with the shutdown. And if they want to continue to refuse to negotiate, Obama can deal with having to reduce spending dramatically should the debt ceiling not be lifted.

The GOP had their chance to strike down Obamacare (last presidential election) and FAILED. You lost the fight. Obamacare is the law of the land and it is here to stay until the Republicans can convince enough of the American people to vote for them in the next election cycles.

This childish attempt to subvert the law via shutdown will cost them dearly, and already is. The fact that you support such actions shows me you aren't really worth listening to.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,328
126
Yes, it's from Mother Jones - a "liberal rag," but it really hits the nail on the head:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/10/john-boehner-cruzified-cross-tea



Why on earth would anyone expect Democrats to "concede" anything under the current circumstances? Let me put this another way: If the situation were reversed, and Democrats were holding the Republican-controlled government hostage and demanding "concessions" on tax rates ("We want to raise the top marginal rate on the top 1% only 0.5%"), and in return the Democrats agreed to fund the government for six weeks (but wouldn't negotiate a full-year budget), do you think that Republicans would go along with that strategy?

Of course not.

So, in your opinion, the answer is for neither side to actually negotiate? Winner take all?
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
The GOP had their chance to strike down Obamacare (last presidential election) and FAILED. You lost the fight. Obamacare is the law of the land and it is here to stay until the Republicans can convince enough of the American people to vote for them in the next election cycles.

This childish attempt to subvert the law via shutdown will cost them dearly, and already is. The fact that you support such actions shows me you aren't really worth listening to.

Repeating things doesn't help make them any more true. Keep on thinking this is about Obamacare even as the 16% cuts go into effect. I don't care if Obamacare stays and you can keep it for all I care, I'd prefer you see its failure through to the very bitter end. Either way, the big spending cuts are coming. That's the end game. Everything else is just bluster and hyperbole.

When your side starts resorting to Hail Mary arguments like the government shutdown is un-Biblical" I know that the reality is starting to set in for your side.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Yep, I'm childish by pointing out the natural endgame to the OP position of "no negotiation." Not those saying the GOP is engaged in "hostage taking" or "Teahadists" or whatnot. I find it very interesting that you think "blackmail" about budget talks is worse than a 16% cut to mandatory spending. As for the "consequences of the ideology," I've already linked to them and I actually don't find them very objectionable. We'll see if the consequences you foresee come to pass; they certainly didn't with the sequester.

This is what I'm talking about, you have a child's understanding of how this all works. Comparing the sequester First, ANY cuts to mandatory spending are in fact illegal. As in, every bit as illegal as spending in excess of the debt ceiling. Secondly, I have no idea where your article got the $30 billion a month number. Estimated federal deficits for FY2014 are considerably higher than $30 billion per month. There will be a sudden contraction of an annualized basis of 4 percentage points of GDP or so. There was only two months of the financial crisis in which GDP contracted faster, but only this time there's no government there to back things up.

Secondly, as that article mentions, federal revenues don't work like that. Some months the government takes in much more money than it puts out, other months much less. The US payments systems are simply not prepared to process payments in that way. There will be chaos with the payment system. (by the way, those saying we can pay the interest on our debt under a default scenario frequently overlook this fact. It may very well cause a default.)

I'm sure you don't find them objectionable now, but you will. As any parent knows, sometimes kids don't listen when you tell them the stove is hot; they have to find out for themselves. I sincerely hope that isn't the case with US conservatives, but if it is we might as well teach them a lesson now rather than later.

When it goes wrong I'm sure you'll still find a way to blame the evil liberals. Anything to avoid admitting fault or accepting blame.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
You guys have to remember that for glenn it's about beating the other political sports team. In a recent thread he got mad about how people were being mean to Republicans so he said they should just shut down the House for the remainder of the term.

It's entirely emotional to him, he's so invested in it that winning is all that matters, no matter the consequences.