Reply With Quote
interesting take for Chait
& cut spending, sequester across the board like the january 2013 sequestration x 10... and stop making and passing stupid ass spending bills.
& increase Fed interest rate to a mandatory minimum 5% at least guaranteed for the next 3 years. crack down on mass borrowing.
Roll back the national debt and consumer goods/real estate prices to 1999, please.
interesting take for Chait
Oh there's gonna be a reckoning
He's got a point there
Sure will look like Pelosi did a corrupt deal with Senate "moderates" to deep six Biden's agenda in favor of incremental change without any tangible political benefit if the BIF passes and the big bill doesn't. It's almost like majority rule is too y for Dems.
Mitch McConnell and the Republicans don't have that problem.
I called this months ago... Manchin and Sinema are going to sink this government. Mitch only ever had this problem with McCain det one time.
Really befuddling how these people (Biden, Chuck, now Pelosi) don't see it from a mile away. Nobody cares about bipartisanship in this environment, especially on legislation that makes one party look good.
Did Mitch care about bipartisanship when packing the SCOTUS? He didn't even think twice about blowing the filibuster over that one.
Both parties are looking for the next attack ad, which now is going to include "he did nothing in 2 years while you were struggling with COVID".
The GOP playbook has been to delay delay delay until the midterms. Manchin and Sinema have been complete enablers on that.
This is obviously until the next Wall Street bailout, then yes, bipartisanship saves the day.
I pray you're right, El. I'd give my left nut for your (call) to hit on all points.
Sure, I'd lose a host of goodies, but I'll stand that gaffe.
do tell
Absolutely, Winester.
I told you it was a win/win election
You could've had Amy
All I wanted was the big loser gone. I received my wish
I told you it was a win/win election
You could've had Amy
Klobs couldn't beat Biden
I told you it was a win/win election
You could've had Amy
https://www.usatoday.com/elections/r...es/democratic/
embrace the suck or suck the cope, Snake boi
Sure sounds like you're happyAll I wanted was the big loser gone. I received my wish
My guy lost but you're the real loser here
making that sell was a big part of joe's campaign, though.
dems insisting that these bills must happen simultaneously only gives the reupblican senators who WERE on board an out.
Old Joe did right by me already, he doesn't owe me a thing.
I just find very amateurish all that talk about bipartisanship and what not if you want to get something done.
Even in the Newt days, the polarization on the street wasn't what it is now.
And you can take off that mask, we know det one last presidential election still hurts
We're a year away from the midterms, and the only thing this administration has to show for from their agenda is a single COVID rescue package.
Let's be honest here, out of all the things this administration proposed (electoral, immigration, criminal reform, etc), infrastructure legislation is far and away the easiest one to tackle. But, they likely won't even get that done, mostly because of Sinema and Manchin.
And should the GOP cult win both chambers of Congress a year from now, I'm not even sure Old Joe ends his term. That's where we're at here.
When somebody brings up in a couple of years why Biden didn't do X or Y despite they had majority in Congress and controlled the executive, I don't want to hear muh filibuster, that's not the reason.
Pelosi wavers
In response to a question about the progressive threat, Pelosi implied there does need to be an agreement on “legislative language” for the budget bill in order for the infrastructure vote to occur.
“I think that we come to a place where we have agreement in legislative language ― not just principal ― in legislative language that the president supports,” Pelosi said Wednesday.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nancy...408bd1c326?41jAsked Wednesday if she was specifically saying there had to be an agreement on budget bill text before the infrastructure vote, Pelosi said she wanted the two things done “simultaneously.”
Woody
Couple a suckers, Winester.
Looks like that 3.5 trillion is going down in flames. Now let's see if the "progressives" torpedo the infrastructure deal. They just got too greedy on the "pork for everyone" package.
Lol, woody has his nose out.
You didn't bat an eye when five defense contractors got trillions to fight failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You certainly didn't call it a boondoggle or "pork for everyone."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
