Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

:lmao:  You'll congratulate Republicans when they go along with your side?  How about removing all the pork from the bill and trying again?

Has Tim even acknowledged the pork?

It's just "Why do Republicans want us to be poor?"

I would hope people realize the Democrats are perfectly capable of proposing a stimulus without a bunch of pork tied to it and they're just as culpable for failing to do so.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 605
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I call  on all the anectdotes from far right leaning folks who know someone's cousin or sister or grandmother that got three mail in ballots and 2 checks and all that jazz.

90% of congress probably doesnt either.

Party over country.  They don't want to give Biden a win.

10 hours ago, unckeyherb said:

Is it not possible to simply put forth a bill that funds COVID relief and only COVID relief?  I get the idea that pork is included in most maybe all bills.  But the numbers I’m seeing is that something like 9% of the bill is actually funding for people affected by COVID to be applied this year.  Shame on everyone for playing politics with this.  Just propose a bill that does what it is intended to do.  If the gop still turns their nose up at it then they can suffer the consequences.  I doubt that would be the case.  ####### ridiculous 

They did do that and the GOP controlled Senate refused to vote on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FairWarning said:
11 hours ago, CletiusMaximus said:

Why on earth did they cave on this?  Yes, it’s a rhetorical question.  

Maybe they listened to small business for a change.  If NYC wants to pay their workers $15/hour, go ahead.  

This seems extremely unlikely to me.  The much more likely answer is the Democrats never had the votes a $15 minimum wage to begin with, and were prepared to drop it from the outset.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Drunken Cowboy said:

I think people need to remember this is primarily an economic stimulus bill.

This is the answer.   It is not strictly a Covid relief bill, it is intended to stimulate the economy.   Now you can argue whether or not it will do that effectively but people saying "just cut out the stuff that doesn't provide Covid relief" are missing the point of the bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, CletiusMaximus said:

This seems extremely unlikely to me.  The much more likely answer is the Democrats never had the votes a $15 minimum wage to begin with, and were prepared to drop it from the outset.

Either they didn't have the votes for the minimum wage hike or they didn't have the votes for nuking the filibuster. (Or both.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

This is the answer.   It is not strictly a Covid relief bill, it is intended to stimulate the economy.   Now you can argue whether or not it will do that effectively but people saying "just cut out the stuff that doesn't provide Covid relief" are missing the point of the bill.

Lmao. Please explain why this economy that is "on fire" needs stimulus.

10% GDP growth? The U.S. economy is on fire, and is about to get stoked even more.

The U.S. economy has roared back to life in 2021, with first-quarter growth set to defy even the rosiest expectations as another fresh influx of cash looms.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/02/10percent-gdp-growth-the-us-economy-is-on-fire-and-is-about-to-get-stoked-even-more.html

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jm192 said:

Has Tim even acknowledged the pork?

It's just "Why do Republicans want us to be poor?"

I would hope people realize the Democrats are perfectly capable of proposing a stimulus without a bunch of pork tied to it and they're just as culpable for failing to do so.

Of course not. None of the liberals can explain how $700 billion being spent in 2022 and beyond is "stimulus."

Edited by Stoneworker
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Stoneworker said:

Lmao. Please explain why this economy that is "on fire" needs stimulus.

10% GDP growth? The U.S. economy is on fire, and is about to get stoked even more.

The U.S. economy has roared back to life in 2021, with first-quarter growth set to defy even the rosiest expectations as another fresh influx of cash looms.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/02/10percent-gdp-growth-the-us-economy-is-on-fire-and-is-about-to-get-stoked-even-more.html

It is great that the economy is recovering but it is far from "on fire".   The reason for the nearly double digit growth is because of the decimation caused by Covid.   Unemployment is still way too high and many industries and small businesses are still hurting big time.   

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Godsbrother said:

The reason for the nearly double digit growth is because of the decimation caused by Covid. 

Nope.

However, it will no longer be a ‘recovery’ beyond Q1 because real GDP will have fully recovered during the current quarter

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

  Unemployment is still way too high and many industries and small businesses are still hurting big time.   

I don't disagree with this part...but that is why the bill as it stands should be rejected. Move forward with better targeted stimmy checks and vaccine support only at this time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, timschochet said:

1. 75% of the American public supports the COVID relief bill. 
2. Over 50%of Republicans support it. 
3. The vast majority of Republican governors and state legislators support it. 
4. The main opposition to the bill was the minimum wage increase; that will not be part of the final bill so it is no longer an issue. 
5. During impeachment Republicans complained that we needed to move on as a nation to work on bipartisan proposals like COVID relief. 
 

Yet this bill is going to pass without a single Republican vote in House or Senate. Can anyone explain this? 

the poll's show support - I think reality is most people see this close to 2 Trillion dollar package as NOT Covid relief at all but furthering agenda

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

It MIGHT be called Covid Relief because if they called it liberal pet projects it would get even less support.

There is a long history of bills given deceptive names by both parties.  In this case at least it actually helps people that are hurting rather than give tax breaks to the rich or pet projects to oil companies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

the poll's show support - I think reality is most people see this close to 2 Trillion dollar package as NOT Covid relief at all but furthering agenda

 

 

Elections have consequences. I hope the Democrats keep furthering their agenda. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jm192 said:

Has Tim even acknowledged the pork?

 

Yes. Please refer to the first page of this thread. 

But the “pork” argument doesn’t hold because several bills that Republicans passed during the Trump years had far more pork than this. (For example the ridiculous military spending Bill in which billions were thrown at antiquated weaponry and bases because certain congressmen and senators wanted to please their districts,) After 4 years of expanding the national debt to levels that no Democrat would have dared to suggest, the idea that Republicans are now, under President Biden, suddenly concerned about austerity is simply not going to fly. 
And it’s just dumb. They’re going to lose this, it’s going to cost them vital seats in 2022. It’s a stupid hill to die on. That’s why I asked the question in the OP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Yes. Please refer to the first page of this thread. 

But the “pork” argument doesn’t hold because several bills that Republicans passed during the Trump years had far more pork than this. (For example the ridiculous military spending Bill in which billions were thrown at antiquated weaponry and bases because certain congressmen and senators wanted to please their districts,) After 4 years of expanding the national debt to levels that no Democrat would have dared to suggest, the idea that Republicans are now, under President Biden, suddenly concerned about austerity is simply not going to fly. 
And it’s just dumb. They’re going to lose this, it’s going to cost them vital seats in 2022. It’s a stupid hill to die on. That’s why I asked the question in the OP. 

No argument ever holds because whataboutism.  

"Republicans hate Americans because they won't approve this stimulus bill."

What about Pelosi refusing to work with Trump on a stimulus?  Did she hate the American people?  Anyone can whataboutism until the end of time on every issue.  We're just going to have a lot of ridiculous repetitive conversations if it always falls back to well the Republicans did xy and z in 2018, so I don't care about that argument now.  I can dig up a whataboutism on anyone issue, and by your logic, just reject someone's reasoning becuase #whatabout.

The Republicans have said that the pork is the issue.  You can say the argument doesn't hold weight--but that's their reasoning.  You asked why they won't vote.  That's the answer.  They've said it's the answer.  Don't ask the question if you're going to say "no, I reject that answer."  

 

 

Edited by jm192
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, timschochet said:

(For example the ridiculous military spending Bill in which billions were thrown at antiquated weaponry and bases because certain congressmen and senators wanted to please their districts,)

This is the time for the rolling emoji. It's only Republicans who have done this? And in the past four years?

Oh my God, man.

Dude, the Republicans aren't getting hurt by this at all. If anyone is going to get hurt, it's the Democrats. They're going to get hurt because they wouldn't cop to the full two grand promised people. You think people care about spending programs? #### no. They care about money in their pocket, not how long you can draw out unemployment.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rockaction said:

This is the time for the rolling emoji. It's only Republicans who have done this? And in the past four years?

Oh my God, man.

Dude, the Republicans aren't getting hurt by this at all. If anyone is going to get hurt, it's the Democrats. They're going to get hurt because they wouldn't cop to the full two grand promised people. You think people care about spending programs? #### no. They care about money in their pocket, not how long you can draw out unemployment.

If you think Democrats are going to be hurt by this I don’t think you’re reading the tea leaves correctly. But let’s remember this conversation and discuss it in two years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Yes. Please refer to the first page of this thread. 

But the “pork” argument doesn’t hold because several bills that Republicans passed during the Trump years had far more pork than this. (For example the ridiculous military spending Bill in which billions were thrown at antiquated weaponry and bases because certain congressmen and senators wanted to please their districts,) After 4 years of expanding the national debt to levels that no Democrat would have dared to suggest, the idea that Republicans are now, under President Biden, suddenly concerned about austerity is simply not going to fly. 
And it’s just dumb. They’re going to lose this, it’s going to cost them vital seats in 2022. It’s a stupid hill to die on. That’s why I asked the question in the OP. 

This is just horrible. You can't defend the actual contents of the bill (e.g. $700 billion CBO analysis) so just revert to whataboutism. So weak.

Even Manchin and other Democrats are poking holes in things like the $400 unemployment benefits.

"Three hundred dollars is where we’ve been. It’s consistent with what we’ve been doing. It’s kind of hard to explain you’re getting a bump up now basically, when you’re ready to come off,” said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), one of the moderates making the last-minute push.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/02/senate-democrats-minimum-wage-unemployment-472440

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jm192 said:

No argument ever holds because whataboutism.  

"Republicans hate Americans because they won't approve this stimulus bill."

What about Pelosi refusing to work with Trump on a stimulus?  Did she hate the American people?  Anyone can whataboutism until the end of time on every issue.  We're just going to have a lot of ridiculous repetitive conversations if it always falls back to well the Republicans did xy and z in 2018, so I don't care about that argument now.  I can dig up a whataboutism on anyone issue, and by your logic, just reject someone's reasoning becuase #whatabout.

The Republicans have said that the pork is the issue.  You can say the argument doesn't hold weight--but that's their reasoning.  You asked why they won't vote.  That's the answer.  They've said it's the answer.  Don't ask the question if you're going to say "no, I reject that answer."  

 

 

I reject that answer. It’s bogus. 
I detest whataboutisms, and didn’t employ one in the post. I also detest bringing up hypocrisy. In truth I don’t care that Republicans are being hypocritical here, I brought it up not to shame them but only to point out that it won’t help them politically. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stoneworker said:

This is just horrible. You can't defend the actual contents of the bill (e.g. $700 billion CBO analysis) so just revert to whataboutism. So weak.

Even Manchin and other Democrats are poking holes in things like the $400 unemployment benefits.

"Three hundred dollars is where we’ve been. It’s consistent with what we’ve been doing. It’s kind of hard to explain you’re getting a bump up now basically, when you’re ready to come off,” said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), one of the moderates making the last-minute push.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/02/senate-democrats-minimum-wage-unemployment-472440

I did defend the actual contents of the bill on the first page. What I wrote is that it’s an overall positive to spend this money despite the pork. That’s my defense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is typical thoughtfulness of Democrats defending their package...they just want what they want.

“The caucus wants it to stay at $400,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio.) on Tuesday night. Asked why, he answered: “Because we’re not Republicans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Stoneworker said:

This is typical thoughtfulness of Democrats defending their package...they just want what they want.

“The caucus wants it to stay at $400,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio.) on Tuesday night. Asked why, he answered: “Because we’re not Republicans.

They’re being ridiculously cocky here for sure. But that’s what happens when you have 75% of the public on your side. They know it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, timschochet said:
26 minutes ago, jm192 said:

You asked why they won't vote.  That's the answer.  They've said it's the answer.  Don't ask the question if you're going to say "no, I reject that answer."  

I reject that answer. It’s bogus.  

Just curious, why do you think Republicans won't vote for the bill?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, timschochet said:

If you think Democrats are going to be hurt by this I don’t think you’re reading the tea leaves correctly. But let’s remember this conversation and discuss it in two years. 

Sure, but I'm not putting any money on electoral wins by the crazy party. That's on Team Red. My point is that the public is going to look at 1.9 trillion and wonder why more of it isn't in their pockets instead of building tunnels in Silicon Valley. That won't play well in small towns and in the service industries. That check should be about 2,500 dollars for each citizen, never mind pork projects that benefit the already wealthy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

Just curious, why do you think Republicans won't vote for the bill?

My guess is that due to Donald Trump’s rhetoric the base of the Republican Party firmly believes that Democrats are not just wrong but evil, not just the opposition but the enemy. And thus Republicans in office don’t dare support anything that Democrats sponsored, even if a majority of Republicans overall are in favor. 
But I don’t know for sure. That’s why I asked the question. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rockaction said:

Sure, but I'm not putting any money on electoral wins by the crazy party. That's on Team Red. My point is that the public is going to look at 1.9 trillion and wonder why more of it isn't in their pockets instead of building tunnels in Silicon Valley. That won't play well in small towns and in the service industries. That check should be about 2,500 dollars for each citizen, never mind pork projects that benefit the already wealthy. 

I don’t think they’re ever going to consider this. They’ll get the money, and the vaccine, COVID will be over and the economy will boom. The Republicans will try to pretend they never opposed this bill, and complain about cancel culture. And in 2022 the Democrats are going to win big. That’s my prediction, take it with the appropriate grain of salt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

My guess is that due to Donald Trump’s rhetoric the base of the Republican Party firmly believes that Democrats are not just wrong but evil, not just the opposition but the enemy. And thus Republicans in office don’t dare support anything that Democrats sponsored, even if a majority of Republicans overall are in favor. 
But I don’t know for sure. That’s why I asked the question. 

It's probably Occam's razor. There's a lot of pork in it and they've done their polling and have found out what plays with their base. They're not going to suffer politically from it. Your original conclusion, in my estimation, is unsound.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

I don’t think they’re ever going to consider this. They’ll get the money, and the vaccine, COVID will be over and the economy will boom. The Republicans will try to pretend they never opposed this bill, and complain about cancel culture. And in 2022 the Democrats are going to win big. That’s my prediction, take it with the appropriate grain of salt. 

Depends how crazy the Dems get with their agenda, actually, and what seats are up in what districts, etc. That'll be the most important thing. If reparations start creeping into the foreground, that'll be a hot button issue. And there's too much noise around the word in political circles for it not to be creeping into the discussion (I'm not talking on this board. A quick Google search will lead one to stories in the past few days about it.)

https://news.yahoo.com/biden-top-aide-says-white-223154235.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Yes. Please refer to the first page of this thread. 

But the “pork” argument doesn’t hold because several bills that Republicans passed during the Trump years had far more pork than this. (For example the ridiculous military spending Bill in which billions were thrown at antiquated weaponry and bases because certain congressmen and senators wanted to please their districts,) After 4 years of expanding the national debt to levels that no Democrat would have dared to suggest, the idea that Republicans are now, under President Biden, suddenly concerned about austerity is simply not going to fly. 
And it’s just dumb. They’re going to lose this, it’s going to cost them vital seats in 2022. It’s a stupid hill to die on. That’s why I asked the question in the OP. 

were those bills passed with pork spending labeled Covid relief ?

thoughts on this ?

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/feb/25/stimulus-check-1400-you-1400-week-federal-employee/

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Depends how crazy the Dems get with their agenda, actually, and what seats are up in what districts, etc. That'll be the most important thing. If reparations start creeping into the foreground, that'll be a hot button issue. And there's too much noise around the word in political circles for it not to be creeping into the discussion (I'm not talking on this board. A quick Google search will lead one to stories in the past few days about it.)

https://news.yahoo.com/biden-top-aide-says-white-223154235.html

I don’t think Democrats are dumb enough to seriously promote reparations. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

I don’t think Democrats are dumb enough to seriously promote reparations. 

Did you click the link?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, timschochet said:

My guess is that due to Donald Trump’s rhetoric the base of the Republican Party firmly believes that Democrats are not just wrong but evil, not just the opposition but the enemy. And thus Republicans in office don’t dare support anything that Democrats sponsored, even if a majority of Republicans overall are in favor. 
But I don’t know for sure. That’s why I asked the question. 

Perhaps I'm not quite as cynical. I would hardly call Romney, Collins, Murkowski and the rest of the "Group of Ten" GOP senators as Trump supporters.

The GOP $618 billion counteroffer was admittedly too low out of the gate. However, the CBO analysis showed how much Democratic pork is actually in the $1.9 trillion.

So Democrats have the clear negotiating advantage....but I firmly believed something could have been worked out in the $1.3-$1.4 trillion range.

Instead, the Democrats went full-on cram down.

Completely legitimate for Republicans to vote No.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying the linked article says that there will be reparations as we conceive of them, but that's a pretty high level of office that is entertaining a commission regarding what ways we can make reparations to blacks in America. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rockaction said:

Did you click the link?

Yes. But I don’t think it will be pushed. We’ll see. 

I do agree with you that if they really do push that it could turn the tables. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Yes. But I don’t think it will be pushed. We’ll see.

I don't think so, either. It looks like Biden is passing off the more radically liberal suggestions off to committees and commissions that will find facts and make recommendations that are likely milquetoast compared to what we think of as the more drastic and weirdly, appropriate solutions, in this case direct cash payments to blacks by virtue of skin color. But the fact that he entertains it in this way proves something more about the tendencies and proclivities of his base of support. It'll surely come up again, no matter how conservatively he tries to handle it (and he is handling it conservatively by shunting it off to committee).

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I don't think so, either. It looks like Biden is passing off the more radically liberal suggestions off to committees and commissions that will find facts and make recommendations that are likely milquetoast compared to what we think of as the more drastic and weirdly, appropriate solutions, in this case direct cash payments to blacks by virtue of skin color. But the fact that he entertains it in this way proves something more about the tendencies and proclivities of his base of support. It'll surely come up again, no matter how conservatively he tries to handle it (and he is handling it conservatively by shunting it off to committee).

It will come up again, and there will be some criticism of Biden by the Squad types, and right wing talk shows and Fox will jump on it to aggravate the base, and over the next few years we will no doubt hear more about reparations along with cancel culture and defund police. 
But unless it actually happens (or is actually voted upon as a serious proposal) it’s not going to change votes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I see zero reason to believe that this is true.

So then are you going to be the first to actually explain why $700 billion of the so-called emergency relief is being spent in 2022 and beyond, as per the CBO?

Or maybe justify why an economy that's already will be back to pre-COVID GDP levels in Q1 needs $1.9 trillion stimulus?

Democrats are predictably long emotional arguments...but fall far short on legitimate economic ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

It will come up again, and there will be some criticism of Biden by the Squad types, and right wing talk shows and Fox will jump on it to aggravate the base, and over the next few years we will no doubt hear more about reparations along with cancel culture and defund police. 
But unless it actually happens (or is actually voted upon as a serious proposal) it’s not going to change votes. 

Let's not chalk this up to right-wing fear mongering when you have the White House volunteering they're sending this to a commission as the result of a House resolution. Please let's not go there just yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Stoneworker said:

So then are you going to be the first to actually explain why $700 billion of the so-called emergency relief is being spent in 2022 and beyond, as per the CBO?

Or maybe justify why an economy that's already will be back to pre-COVID GDP levels in Q1 needs $1.9 trillion stimulus?

Democrats are predictably long emotional arguments...but fall far short on legitimate economic ones.

I'd be careful lumping fatguy in there. He's nothing if not transparently honest and very rational. 

Edited by rockaction
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Stoneworker said:

So then are you going to be the first to actually explain why $700 billion of the so-called emergency relief is being spent in 2022 and beyond, as per the CBO?

Or maybe justify why an economy that's already will be back to pre-COVID GDP levels in Q1 needs $1.9 trillion stimulus?

Democrats are predictably long emotional arguments...but fall far short on legitimate economic ones.

Because these are all policies that Democrats support.  And because Senate procedure only allows reconciliation once a year (I think), so they have very limited opportunities to enact them if they don’t do so here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Because these are all policies that Democrats support.  And because Senate procedure only allows reconciliation once a year (I think), so they have very limited opportunities to enact them if they don’t do so here.

Exactly. If they don't get it now they won't be able to. You have the votes so do it. The Republicans would. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Because these are all policies that Democrats support.  And because Senate procedure only allows reconciliation once a year (I think), so they have very limited opportunities to enact them if they don’t do so here.

Ok. So now we get to the truth (which I have no problem with).

This is a partisan cram-down bill full of Democratic priorities way beyond the scope of the current crisis. Major aspects of it simply cannot be defended from a broad economic standpoint given where the U.S. recovery stands, and therefore are likely to be highly inflationary as early as 2H 2021.

The OP asked why GOP didn't vote for such a bill (although they clearly support a good portion of it). This is why.

I appreciate the candor calling a spade a spade.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Stoneworker said:

BTW, I believe Congress is allowed up to three budget reconciliations a year. So infrastructure/clean energy will likely be next and treated similarly.

I'm not a parlimentarian, but here's what wikipedia says:

Quote

Congress can pass up to three reconciliation bills per year, with each bill addressing the major topics of reconciliation: revenue, spending, and the federal debt limit. However, if Congress passes a reconciliation bill affecting more than one of those topics, it cannot pass another reconciliation bill later in the year affecting one of the topics addressed by the previous reconciliation bill.[2] In practice, reconciliation bills have usually been passed once per year at most.[15]

So whether it's three times a year or one, Democrats only have a small number of chances to pass legislation and they don't want this one to go to waste.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I'm not a parlimentarian, but here's what wikipedia says:

So whether it's three times a year or one, Democrats only have a small number of chances to pass legislation and they don't want this one to go to waste.

They have 2 years use them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

I reject that answer. It’s bogus. 
I detest whataboutisms, and didn’t employ one in the post. I also detest bringing up hypocrisy. In truth I don’t care that Republicans are being hypocritical here, I brought it up not to shame them but only to point out that it won’t help them politically. 

It's not bogus.  You asked why, and they've told us why.

You pulled the whatboutism without saying "what about," but you're still referencing "you were ok with it for the past 4 years, so what's different this time?!?!?!?"

I think it's absurd to ask a question, get the answer, and then reject the answer.  If you don't care what they have to say and "I think Republicans think Dems are evil," well there's really no point in a thread or discussion.  You've already got the answer you want in your head.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I'm not a parlimentarian, but here's what wikipedia says:

So whether it's three times a year or one, Democrats only have a small number of chances to pass legislation and they don't want this one to go to waste.

Fine. But the issue is that it's only legislation directly related to spending on specific budget line items.

Therefore, other legislative areas (e.g. immigration reform) that require 60 Senate votes have zero chance moving forward.

Of course Democrats never had any intention of bi-partisanship on this or any other issue ("it's my turn!"); so it would have been much better for Biden et. al. to spare us the "unity" rhetoric.

And now we're even more divided with only budget reconciliations and executive orders with which to govern.

Short-term political party gain in exchange for further long-term damage.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • timschochet changed the title to The Covid Relief Bill

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...