Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 430
  1. #26
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    The Rob Portman bill doesn’t have support from a majority of the house right now. That’s the bottom line. If Pelosi put it to a vote right now, it would fail. It’s a ty bill that Exxon Mobile wrote. That’s the only reason it hasn’t gone to the floor for a vote yet.

  2. #27
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    yeah i have a problem with holding up a solid bill that will help a lot of people in return for changes to a separate bill. we give manchin and sinema a lot of deserved grief because they hold up the party's agenda. i will hold progressives to that same standard when we have a bill like this in the balance
    accusing progressives of being the ones holding up the party’s agenda right now.

    Manchin and Sinema made a deal with Schumer, they could waste time playing grab ass with Rob Portman as long as they supported reconciliation, and they’re welching on that deal. The progressives have every right to hold them to what they agreed to.

  3. #28
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    i dont really need the benefit of hindsight. jeopardizing it is bad enough right now. the infrastructure bill is a good one. get that out. then get to work on reconciliation. and if you are right on the issues, whip the votes, convince the public, etc
    This is the double standard you don’t realize. Why are progressives obligated to vote for the Rob Portman bill just because you personally think they should but when it comes to their bill getting support, they need to bootstrap it and “whip the votes”? Presumably if Manchin and Sinema were right on the issues, they’d be able to whip a majority of the house to vote for their bill. So far they’ve failed to do that and you’re blaming it on progressives.

  4. #29
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    43,734
    At this point I'm ready for both bills to go down in flames.

  5. #30
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    At this point I'm ready for both bills to go down in flames.
    BIF is a genuinely bad bill, if for no reason other than the fact it’s basically unpaid for, so I’d love to see it fail.

    After 4 months of jerking each other off, the bipartisan senator group managed to come up with the bright idea of “increased unemployment insurance enforcement” as the way to finance a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill

  6. #31
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    accusing progressives of being the ones holding up the party’s agenda right now.

    Manchin and Sinema made a deal with Schumer, they could waste time playing grab ass with Rob Portman as long as they supported reconciliation, and they’re welching on that deal. The progressives have every right to hold them to what they agreed to.
    i align much more with the progressives when it comes to policy goals, so its not a matter of team sports for me

    but they're objectively the ones holding back the infrastructure bill. its manchin/sinema holding up the big reconciliation package

  7. #32
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    i align much more with the progressives when it comes to policy goals.

    but they're objectively the ones holding back the infrastructure bill. its manchin/sinema holding up the big reconciliation package
    Agreed and I’m ok with that. The Rob Portman Infrastructure Bill is a joke and isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

  8. #33
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    This is the double standard you don’t realize. Why are progressives obligated to vote for the Rob Portman bill just because you personally think they should but when it comes to their bill getting support, they need to bootstrap it and “whip the votes”? Presumably if Manchin and Sinema were right on the issues, they’d be able to whip a majority of the house to vote for their bill. So far they’ve failed to do that and you’re blaming it on progressives.
    because the only way you're getting a non-reconciliation bill through the senate is with bipartisan support. you aren't going to get a very progressive package with the infrastructure bill because you need some republican senators to sign on.

    you could be much more aggressive with the reconciliation because you dont need to nuke the filibuster to jam that with 50 votes. you might say the whole thing and just pack all the infrastructure stuff into a bigger reconciliation bill, but that's not going to happen either.

    pragmatism has to win out at some point.

  9. #34
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    This is the double standard you don’t realize. Why are progressives obligated to vote for the Rob Portman bill just because you personally think they should but when it comes to their bill getting support, they need to bootstrap it and “whip the votes”? Presumably if Manchin and Sinema were right on the issues, they’d be able to whip a majority of the house to vote for their bill. So far they’ve failed to do that and you’re blaming it on progressives.
    There is large contingency of centrists in the Democratic party that have bizarrely sucked up a lot of the anti-squad right wing propadanda.

    Sort of does the work of the fascist party, IMO, and is somewhat counter productive.

  10. #35
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    because the only way you're getting a non-reconciliation bill through the senate is with bipartisan support. you aren't going to get a very progressive package with the infrastructure bill.

    you could be much more aggressive with the reconciliation because you dont need to nuke the filibuster to jam that with 50 votes
    Theres nothing in the infrastructure bill that couldn’t have been done through reconciliation though. All Manchin and Sinema did was complicate the process by insisting on letting Rob StopTheSteal Portman bend them over.

    Legislation shouldn’t get affirmative action votes just because it’s bipartisan. If it’s legislation (which The Rob Portman Infrastructure Plan is) then house reps should be free to vote it down.

  11. #36
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    Agreed and I’m ok with that. The Rob Portman Infrastructure Bill is a joke and isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.
    its not the perfect version of what i wanted. and i think they should pack as much climate based spending in reconciliation as possible. but even as a standalone bill, the infrastructure package will help a lot of people. you want to run down the list of things in that bill that would help people asap? lead pipe removal. tens of billions into transit/rail instead of dumbass hyperloop dreams.

    goes without saying roads/bridges and whatnot

  12. #37
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    you might say the whole thing and just pack all the infrastructure stuff into a bigger reconciliation bill, but that's not going to happen either.

    pragmatism has to win out at some point.
    Just want to be clear, you’re saying that unnecessarily bifurcating this into two bills where one needs 60 votes and the other needs 50 was the PRAGMATIC approach

    it would sure seem a of a lot more easy and pragmatic to just jam everything into the one bill that only needs 50 votes. Artificially creating the need for a super majority is the literal opposite of pragmatism.

  13. #38
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    Theres nothing in the infrastructure bill that couldn’t have been done through reconciliation though. All Manchin and Sinema did was complicate the process by insisting on letting Rob StopTheSteal Portman bend them over.

    Legislation shouldn’t get affirmative action votes just because it’s bipartisan. If it’s legislation (which The Rob Portman Infrastructure Plan is) then house reps should be free to vote it down.
    the bipartisan aspect of it does play well, imo. in a year with shows at the border and in afghanistan, biden being able to present to the public that for the first time in a long time, he was able to get a bipartisan deal done on a subject that has been promised for years now... its one of his big optical wins. and they're going to need more of that to avoid a 2022 bloodbath. being able to get these kinds of deals done is a point to the competency and pragmatism of the administration. and that matters too

  14. #39
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    Just want to be clear, you’re saying that unnecessarily bifurcating this into two bills where one needs 60 votes and the other needs 50 was the PRAGMATIC approach

    it would sure seem a of a lot more easy and pragmatic to just jam everything into the one bill that only needs 50 votes. Artificially creating the need for a super majority is the literal opposite of pragmatism.
    but you dont have 50 votes for that.

    you think i'm a fan of manchin/sinema?

  15. #40
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    its not the perfect version of what i wanted. and i think they should pack as much climate based spending in reconciliation as possible. but even as a standalone bill, the infrastructure package will help a lot of people. you want to run down the list of things in that bill that would help people asap? lead pipe removal. tens of billions into transit/rail instead of dumbass hyperloop dreams.

    goes without saying roads/bridges and whatnot
    1) Youre ignoring the reality that reconciliation is DOA if Sinema and Manchin already have their photo op bill passed. The only leverage progressives have over them is jamming up their bill. There’s no scenario where the Rob Portman Bill passes now and reconciliation passes later no matter how much you want to speak it into existence.

    I do have a list of people the Rob Portman bill will help tho

    Charles Koch
    Darren Woods
    Michael Wirth

    I can keep going

  16. #41
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    but you dont have 50 votes for that.

    you think i'm a fan of manchin/sinema?
    You're blaming the progressives for what's ultimately Manchin and Sinema's fault tho.

    It's their fault for complicating this process and making it so we unnecessarily needed 10 Republicans to go along with it, it's not the progressives' fault that they aren't willing to let Manchin and Sinema change the rules again in the 4th quarter.

    The reason we don't have 50 votes for the most pragmatic approach is Manchin/Sinema, I fail to see how that means it's the progressives, not them, who aren't being pragmatic.

  17. #42
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    You're blaming the progressives for what's ultimately Manchin and Sinema's fault tho.

    It's their fault for complicating this process and making it so we unnecessarily needed 10 Republicans to go along with it, it's not the progressives' fault that they aren't willing to let Manchin and Sinema change the rules again in the 4th quarter.

    The reason we don't have 50 votes for the most pragmatic approach is Manchin/Sinema, I fail to see how that means it's the progressives, not them, who aren't being pragmatic.
    no. manchin/sinema are bags who are posing a major obstacle to getting a lot of good things done.

    the progressives are just trying to stomp their feet hoping to change their minds. it's not going to happen. all they're doing is amplifying the problems caused by manchin/sinema by holding up legislation that will still help a lot of people

  18. #43
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    no. manchin/sinema are bags who are posing a major obstacle to getting a lot of good things done.

    the progressives are just trying to stomp their feet hoping to change their minds. it's not going to happen. all they're doing is amplifying the problems caused by manchin/sinema by holding up legislation that will still help a lot of people
    But the thing is they're not trying to get Manchin and Sinema to change their minds. They know Manchin and Sinema are bad faith actors who are more likely to support the party's agenda if they have a gun to their head.

    The people who actually think reconciliation can still happen if Manchin and Sinema get what they want first and have all the leverage (you) are the ones being naive and failing to understand how things work.

    You're intentionally obfuscating around the reality that Manchin and Sinema aren't ever going to support reconciliation if the Portman bill passes first.

    Sidenote, I also think that the fact they are amplifying the problems centrists cause is an added bonus. One of the biggest issues in American politics is that people see Manchin and Sinema as "pragmatic, bipartisan dealmakers" when the centrists in congress are the ones who put a roadblock up every time meaningful reform is possible.

  19. #44
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    But the thing is they're not trying to get Manchin and Sinema to change their minds. They know Manchin and Sinema are bad faith actors who are more likely to support the party's agenda if they have a gun to their head.

    The people who actually think reconciliation can still happen if Manchin and Sinema get what they want first and have all the leverage (you) are the ones being naive and failing to understand how things work.

    You're intentionally obfuscating around the reality that Manchin and Sinema aren't ever going to support reconciliation if the Portman bill passes first.
    im dealing with the reality than manchin/sinema are weak links and are part of the 50 you would need.

    i dont think they ever promised a 3.5 trillion reconciliation bill as part of the infrastructure package

  20. #45
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    im dealing with the reality than manchin/sinema are weak links and are part of the 50 you would need.

    i dont think they ever promised a 3.5 trillion reconciliation bill as part of the infrastructure package
    Another post where you obfuscate and refuse to address how reconciliation happens when there's no leverage over Manchin and Sinema anymore.

    Manchin and Sinema absolutely promised to support reconciliation if they could get their ty photo op bill, it's why Biden and Schumer gave them 4 months to play grabass with insurrectionist Rob Portman.

  21. #46
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    the bipartisan aspect of it does play well, imo. in a year with shows at the border and in afghanistan, biden being able to present to the public that for the first time in a long time, he was able to get a bipartisan deal done on a subject that has been promised for years now... its one of his big optical wins. and they're going to need more of that to avoid a 2022 bloodbath. being able to get these kinds of deals done is a point to the competency and pragmatism of the administration. and that matters too
    "Maybe, just maybe, if we let the Republicans bend us over and up our infrastructure agenda, they'll be really nice to us and won't call us socialists during midterm season!"

    If "bipartisanship!" is your biggest selling point, what you're implicitly telling voters is that the other political party makes valid points and should be included in the process. That's terrible politics and its why Democrats underperformed massively last year. The GOP campaigns on "Democrats are evil s and must be defeated" while Democucks campaign on "I'm go to Washington and work with Republicans on muh bipartisanship". It's an extremely weak campaign message that leads to horrible base enthusiasm.

    The way you win elections is jamming a huge infrastructure bill through reconciliation and then campaigning on "Yeah, we did it our way because the GOP's way ing sucks"

  22. #47
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    Another post where you obfuscate and refuse to address how reconciliation happens when there's no leverage over Manchin and Sinema anymore.

    Manchin and Sinema absolutely promised to support reconciliation if they could get their ty photo op bill, it's why Biden and Schumer gave them 4 months to play grabass with insurrectionist Rob Portman.
    "support reconciliation" didnt imply a blank check, imo. they should have had a number specified in this handshake

  23. #48
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,014
    "Maybe, just maybe, if we let the Republicans bend us over and up our infrastructure agenda, they'll be really nice to us and won't call us socialists during midterm season!"

    If "bipartisanship!" is your biggest selling point, what you're implicitly telling voters is that the other political party makes valid points and should be included in the process. That's terrible politics and its why Democrats underperformed massively last year. The GOP campaigns on "Democrats are evil s and must be defeated" while Democucks campaign on "I'm go to Washington and work with Republicans on muh bipartisanship". It's an extremely weak campaign message that leads to horrible base enthusiasm.

    The way you win elections is jamming a huge infrastructure bill through reconciliation and then campaigning on "Yeah, we did it our way because the GOP's way ing sucks"
    i have no delusions about cocaine mitch and the rest of the republicans being nice. its about what plays with voters. yes, the trump newsmax wing of the party is never going to play nice. there are more voters than that

  24. #49
    notthewordsofonewhokneels Thread's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Post Count
    81,180
    i have no delusions about cocaine mitch and the rest of the republicans being nice. its about what plays with voters. yes, the trump newsmax wing of the party is never going to play nice. there are more voters than that
    Only after he dies. The vast lion's share of these people are RINO's biting at the bit to go back to what once was.

  25. #50
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    i have no delusions about cocaine mitch and the rest of the republicans being nice. its about what plays with voters. yes, the trump newsmax wing of the party is never going to play nice. there are more voters than that
    The Trump Newsmax wing is 70+% of all Republicans now...a majority of all Republican voters think the election was stolen. Why on earth would you campaign on wanting to be bipartisan with these people? The goal should be to convince voters Republicans are evil, not that they're people we should be working with on a bipartisan basis.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •