Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

In 2022 if a Republican running for the house and Senate want to say I voted against the stimulus because the Democrats wanted to build a bridge in California go for it. But don't be upset if the Democrat in the same race uses my opponent didn't vote for the stimulus against them. Both are true the voters will decide. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 604
  • 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.

5 minutes ago, Stoneworker said:

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.

This seems disingenuous.  The Democrat-controlled House passed a standalone bill for COVID stimulus checks.  The Republican-controlled Senate ignored it.  Seems like it was the GOP that rejected bipartisanship, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour 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.

This isn't "thought" unique to Democrats :shrug: 

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

This seems disingenuous.  The Democrat-controlled House passed a standalone bill for COVID stimulus checks.  The Republican-controlled Senate ignored it.  Seems like it was the GOP that rejected bipartisanship, no?

You are correct. No GOP can defend that. But Democrats have the opportunity with this bill to seize the moral high ground now that they're in control. Instead it's carbon copy partisanship.

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

I love the wizards in here that have assuredly read the entire bill and concluded that it's all pork.  

Me:  I admittedly haven't read the entire bill

This guy: I love the people claiming to have read the entire bill.

Seriously, are you saying there isn't substantial pork?  The Republicans have said there is and that they won't support that.  I guess they're lying about the pork?  Maybe if I've read it with my own eyes, then I can comment on the Republicans not supporting the pork?

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

You are correct. No GOP can defend that. But Democrats have the opportunity with this bill to seize the moral high ground now that they're in control. Instead it's carbon copy partisanship.

Answer this honestly, though, separate and apart from the contents of this particular bill, which I admit to not having read.  What good does the moral high ground do?  Will anyone in the MAGA crowd cross over and vote for Democrats or support liberal policies if Democrats claim the moral high ground?  For that matter, would anyone in the MAGA crowd even acknowledge that the Democrats have the moral high ground, or would they persist with the liberals are evil tripe?

Would GOP representatives cross over and vote for the bills?  They've pretty much universally stated they will object to all bills so as to avoid giving Biden a win.

Edited by Rich Conway
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Me:  I admittedly haven't read the entire bill

This guy: I love the people claiming to have read the entire bill.

Seriously, are you saying there isn't substantial pork?  The Republicans have said there is and that they won't support that.  I guess they're lying about the pork?  Maybe if I've read it with my own eyes, then I can comment on the Republicans not supporting the pork?

Sounds like a plan!   I'm sure you'll follow up promptly.  

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

What does that have to do with the merits of Brown's actual statement? :shrug:

Nothing....sorry....I was responding to this part of the post:

Quote

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

 

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

Me:  I admittedly haven't read the entire bill

This guy: I love the people claiming to have read the entire bill.

Seriously, are you saying there isn't substantial pork?  The Republicans have said there is and that they won't support that.  I guess they're lying about the pork?  Maybe if I've read it with my own eyes, then I can comment on the Republicans not supporting the pork?

I'm confident there is pork in the bill.  I am not confident in GOP interpretation on quantity.  Just like I am not confident in Dems evaluating GOP bills.  

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

This seems disingenuous.  The Democrat-controlled House passed a standalone bill for COVID stimulus checks.  The Republican-controlled Senate ignored it.  Seems like it was the GOP that rejected bipartisanship, no?

I remember that but never heard why Mitch backed out.  

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

Answer this honestly, though, separate and apart from the contents of this particular bill, which I admit to not having read.  What good does the moral high ground do?  Will anyone in the MAGA crowd cross over and vote for Democrats or support liberal policies if Democrats claim the moral high ground?  For that matter, would anyone in the MAGA crowd even acknowledge that the Democrats have the moral high ground, or would they persist with the liberals are evil tripe?

Would GOP representatives cross over and vote for the bills?  They've pretty much universally stated they will object to all bills so as to avoid giving Biden a win.

There will never be any common ground between hard-line MAGA and hard-line Progressives.

However, as I've stated before, I do believe Dems not working further with the moderate GOP Group of Ten (Romney, Collins, etc.) represented a huge missed opportunity. At least come back with a counteroffer since even Manchin, Portman and other moderate Dems admit to the bill being too bloated.

There was never a legitimate effort to compromise with the Group of Ten on what is obviously a flawed bill. If there was, I'd have no problem with the OP's criticism.

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

There will never be any common ground between hard-line MAGA and hard-line Progressives.

However, as I've stated before, I do believe Dems not working further with the moderate GOP Group of Ten (Romney, Collins, etc.) represented a huge missed opportunity. At least come back with a counteroffer since even Manchin, Portman and other moderate Dems admit to the bill being too bloated.

There was never a legitimate effort to compromise with the Group of Ten on what is obviously a flawed bill. If there was, I'd have no problem with the OP's criticism.

I would rewrite your first sentence to "There will never be any common ground between hard-line MAGA and even moderate Democrats."  Given that, plus the fact that, at this point, the majority of the GOP is hard-line MAGA, what is the incentive for claiming moral high ground (again, ignoring the specific contents of this bill which I haven't read)?

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

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

How about the GOP opposes the bill because they want the economy to tank. It will help them in  2022 and 2024 elections. 

 

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

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.

End of thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

I would rewrite your first sentence to "There will never be any common ground between hard-line MAGA and even moderate Democrats."  Given that, plus the fact that, at this point, the majority of the GOP is hard-line MAGA, what is the incentive for claiming moral high ground (again, ignoring the specific contents of this bill which I haven't read)?

Yeah. Sorry. If people can't understand the intrinsic value of moral high ground without needing a specific incentive...then no amount of explanation is going to be worth the effort.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Stoneworker said:
32 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

I would rewrite your first sentence to "There will never be any common ground between hard-line MAGA and even moderate Democrats."  Given that, plus the fact that, at this point, the majority of the GOP is hard-line MAGA, what is the incentive for claiming moral high ground (again, ignoring the specific contents of this bill which I haven't read)?

Yeah. Sorry. If people can't understand the intrinsic value of moral high ground without needing a specific incentive...then no amount of explanation is going to be worth the effort.

How about if I rephrase to "What is the political benefit to claiming moral high ground?"

I'm not a member of Congress.  I generally live my life according to "do what's right, regardless of consequence", and I don't really have to answer to voters.  Moral high ground has a different meaning to me, personally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, the rover said:

They didn't want to give Pelosi a win.

Don't know what it'll take for both sides to realize they work for us and not their ego.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Insomniac said:

How about the GOP opposes the bill because they want the economy to tank. It will help them in  2022 and 2024 elections. 

 

Well, that's a certainly a take.

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

How about the GOP opposes the bill because they want the economy to tank. It will help them in  2022 and 2024 elections. 

 

...and the Dems support it because they think their partisan pork projects will please their constituents and...gasp...help in 2022 and 2024 elections?

Those darn Republicans, though!

Edit:  Do we really think a lack of a stimulus will "tank" the economy?  A stimulus may boost it, but are going to have a big recession in the absence of a stimus?  Especially considering that a lot of places are starting to open all the way up, this seems like a reach.

Edited by jm192
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

Don't know what it'll take for both sides to realize they work for us and not their ego.

Us booting them out of office and not settling for "lesser of two evils"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jm192 said:
1 hour ago, Insomniac said:

How about the GOP opposes the bill because they want the economy to tank. It will help them in  2022 and 2024 elections. 

 

...and the Dems support it because they think their partisan pork projects will please their constituents and...gasp...help in 2022 and 2024 elections?

Those darn Republicans, though!

Edit:  Do we really think a lack of a stimulus will "tank" the economy?  A stimulus may boost it, but are going to have a big recession in the absence of a stimus?  Especially considering that a lot of places are starting to open all the way up, this seems like a reach.

I'm guessing this is a bit of ironic snark as this is exactly the reason the GOP was claiming the Dems weren't hopping on board with things like the tax cuts and the coronavirus package just before the election.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FairWarning said:

I remember that but never heard why Mitch backed out.  

It was before the Dems won the two Senate races in Georgia.  McConnell thought Republicans were going to win those races and therefore he would have more power to shape the deal.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2021 at 2:51 PM, 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? 

What's in the Bill?  Would you say that we need another 1.9T in COVID relief or could it be pared down to something smaller?  Has the previous COVID funds been exhausted yet (rhetorical: the answer is no)?  

I read one portion of the Bill is to fund schools to make improvements to ventilation systems, etc.  However, the funds won't be used until 2022 at the earliest.  Does that need to be in there in an emergency relief package?  I'm sure we could go through the Bill line-by-line and tear apart other sections that probably don't qualify as emergency relief.      

At some point, the bill (pun intended) will come due.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jm192 said:

...and the Dems support it because they think their partisan pork projects will please their constituents and...gasp...help in 2022 and 2024 elections?

Those darn Republicans, though!

Edit:  Do we really think a lack of a stimulus will "tank" the economy?  A stimulus may boost it, but are going to have a big recession in the absence of a stimus?  Especially considering that a lot of places are starting to open all the way up, this seems like a reach.

 I'd expect a stimulus package would help boost the economy and a lack of stimulus would lead to slower growth. Is there something wrong with the Democrats doing something that will improve the economy over the next 4 years so they win elections  that makes iit as bad as the GOP deliberately trying to hurt the economy so they can regain power?

 It's all just about winning elections. Even if blocking the package only has a 10% chance of causing a recession it's not going to cost the GOP any votes if they fail to block it. It will gain votes for them if they block it results in a worse economy. 

I  believe that there must be some better cheaper way of getting the most out of a stimulus package but it'd probably be a lot harder to sell politically and there's just no chance the GOP would support it anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans would totally be voting for the bill if it had all the payouts to THEIR special interests in there. Rest assured. But in this case, I'm glad for their hypocrisy. This bill has less than half of it to do with "Covid Relief". 

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

 I'd expect a stimulus package would help boost the economy and a lack of stimulus would lead to slower growth. Is there something wrong with the Democrats doing something that will improve the economy over the next 4 years so they win elections  that makes iit as bad as the GOP deliberately trying to hurt the economy so they can regain power?

 It's all just about winning elections. Even if blocking the package only has a 10% chance of causing a recession it's not going to cost the GOP any votes if they fail to block it. It will gain votes for them if they block it results in a worse economy. 

I  believe that there must be some better cheaper way of getting the most out of a stimulus package but it'd probably be a lot harder to sell politically and there's just no chance the GOP would support it anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, it’s not just “give The people stimulus money and help the economy.”

It’s a tunnel for California and a Bridge for New York, etc. 

If all they were proposing was a stimulus for families, I don’t think you’d see much contention with it

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Commish said:

Us booting them out of office and not settling for "lesser of two evils"

I would be guilty of settling for the lesser of two evils.  We need to work on getting better candidates instead of a political American Idol.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

I would be guilty of settling for the lesser of two evils.  We need to work on getting better candidates instead of a political American Idol.  

:goodposting:

If there's one thing we've been shown it's that they will not  raise the bar on their own

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Insein said:

Republicans would totally be voting for the bill if it had all the payouts to THEIR special interests in there. Rest assured. But in this case, I'm glad for their hypocrisy. This bill has less than half of it to do with "Covid Relief". 

Have you read the bill yet?  I havent. 

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

Again, it’s not just “give The people stimulus money and help the economy.”

It’s a tunnel for California and a Bridge for New York, etc. 

If all they were proposing was a stimulus for families, I don’t think you’d see much contention with it

Yeah you would. Look at the points of contention.  They are bickering over what to give us, not the pet projects. The argument is being made that individuals are getting too much money

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

Have you read the bill yet?  I havent. 

Here's a high level summary so far. Ignore the "fact check" part and yahoos poor layout of slipping in links to other articles in the middle of the main article. But essentially it's another bloated spending bill that gives 9% directly to Covid related items, 22% to the stimulus checks, 13% to unemployment, 27% to state and local governments and schools (which is a really vague way of giving money to individual states of their choosing). The remaining 29% is not really explained (even the article contradicts itself saying 85% goes to relief but that only adds up to 71%). Ultimately, some of the American people will get up to 35% of the the money from this thing. 36% will go to state and local governments to use at their discretion. Then the rest will go to pet projects thrown in. 

https://www.yahoo.com/now/fact-check-breaking-down-spending-233113590.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Yeah you would. Look at the points of contention.  They are bickering over what to give us, not the pet projects. The argument is being made that individuals are getting too much money

In fairness, that's the flashpoint. That's where the spending hits home to most voters. But pork is fine!

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

It’s a tunnel for California and a Bridge for New York, etc. 

Work for American's. Good paying jobs.Those things don't build themselves. 

Edited by Mile High
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mile High said:

Work for American's. Good paying jobs.Those things don't build themselves. 

Then the states can fund that individually. It doesn't need to be thrown in here as a favor to whoever congressman. Especially as they have basically destroyed so many jobs in the private sector over the last year. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mile High said:

Work for American's. Good paying jobs.Those things don't build themselves. 

Lol.

A few construction companies get another contract.  The pork projects won’t be some big job creator.

 

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

Then the states can fund that individually. It doesn't need to be thrown in here as a favor to whoever congressman. Especially as they have basically destroyed so many jobs in the private sector over the last year. 

Every state can pay for their own roads and bridges then. Anyway doesn't matter. It's passing.

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

Lol.

A few construction companies get another contract.  The pork projects won’t be some big job creator.

 

Your right not big projects just 101.5 million for the two jobs. Still work so why cry about that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That brings us to the question of what’s actually in the bill.

Republicans have raised this question throughout the discussion of Biden’s proposal, in some cases exaggerating the nature of the spending that’s not tied directly to COVID-19 containment.

A long list of initiatives is clearly related to the pandemic, however.

About 22% of the total bill comes from the $422 billion set aside for $1,400-per-person stimulus checks. Another 13% ($246 billion) is for extending additional unemployment funding of $400 a week.

A combined 12% is going to:

Subsidized COBRA for laid-off workers.

Affordable Care Act subsidies for the next two years.

Expanded nutrition assistance to replace school lunch programs during the pandemic.

Funding for testing and contact tracing.

Disaster Relief Fund increases and covering COVID-19-related funeral expenses.

Grants to airlines and contractors to freeze layoffs through September.

Defense Production Act funding for medical supplies.

Grants for restaurants and bars that have lost revenue in the pandemic.

Economic Injury Disaster Loan Advance grants of up to $10,000 per business.

Another $519 billion – 27% of the total – is going to state and local governments and schools, much of which will make up losses related to the pandemic and help schools reopen. Republicans note much of the school funding, however, won’t be spent immediately.

If the government and school aid is included in this category, about 85% of the American Rescue Plan is pandemic-related, according to a breakdown by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mile High said:

Your right not big projects just 101.5 million for the two jobs. Still work so why cry about that. 

I think this is a ridiculous way to look at it.  

For the record, I'm not particularly upset over the pork projects.  It's been happening for decades and won't stop anytime soon.  The thread is about why Republicans are holding it up.  This is why.  

But to say "Look at all the work this creates."  Why don't we fund trillions of dollars worth of bridges with tax dollars in every state?  That'll create all of the work for everybody.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Mile High said:

Another $519 billion – 27% of the total – is going to state and local governments and schools, much of which will make up losses related to the pandemic and help schools reopen

No it wont. Schools will either open before they get this money or it will be august and this money wont matter one bit.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rockaction said:

In fairness, that's the flashpoint. That's where the spending hits home to most voters. But pork is fine!

Its baffling to me how less than half amount (allegedly...havent read it myself yet) is the flashpoint.  How dumb are we as a colective?

Its like harping on entitlement prgrams outside medicare and SS in terms of what we can "afford" when you could remove all of them and not change the budget deficits in any meaningful way

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

Here's a high level summary so far. Ignore the "fact check" part and yahoos poor layout of slipping in links to other articles in the middle of the main article. But essentially it's another bloated spending bill that gives 9% directly to Covid related items, 22% to the stimulus checks, 13% to unemployment, 27% to state and local governments and schools (which is a really vague way of giving money to individual states of their choosing). The remaining 29% is not really explained (even the article contradicts itself saying 85% goes to relief but that only adds up to 71%). Ultimately, some of the American people will get up to 35% of the the money from this thing. 36% will go to state and local governments to use at their discretion. Then the rest will go to pet projects thrown in. 

https://www.yahoo.com/now/fact-check-breaking-down-spending-233113590.html

So, no?  You havent read it?  Started reading through the unemployment part tonight. Bill states this is to support those who have lost their jobs during covid. If we're going to pretend that extra money isnt there because of the hardship caused by covid and meant to help ease the hardships, i doubt we're going to have a productive conversation. :shrug:  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many substantive bills get passed every year in the United States congress?  Bills that allocate funding for pressing issues whether related to stimulus, disaster/recovery, or health/taxes/ civil/social infrastructure?

I’m guessing very few.  The Trump administration did basically nothing to drive policy initiatives.  It was rule by decree through executive order and bull####, really.  No policy.  And Congress, outside of Paul Ryan’s tax bill basically did sweet #### all for four years too.  Why?  Too busy playing power politics and not enough time rolling up sleeves.  

And it looks like the Biden administration is just doing the same thing, as is the Congress.  Matt Gaetz, a star in the GOP is basically a tv evangelist.  As is Ted Cruz.  As are some Dems.  Politics on the Hill is 90% about power and 10% about substantive policy.  

What’s the point?  Fair question.  The reason there is so much pork in these bills dressed up as aid is because they clowns only get around to doing their job once or twice a year.  Stuff it all in there.  All the work your bureaucrats did for two years and sat collecting dust can be stuffed in the covid bill like a thanksgiving turkey.  

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

How many substantive bills get passed every year in the United States congress?  Bills that allocate funding for pressing issues whether related to stimulus, disaster/recovery, or health/taxes/ civil/social infrastructure?

The reason there is so much pork in these bills dressed up as aid is because they clowns only get around to doing their job once or twice a year.  Stuff it all in there.  All the work your bureaucrats did for two years and sat collecting dust can be stuffed in the covid bill like a thanksgiving turkey.  

In fairness, I think it's because they have the votes now to do it. Don't waste an advantage, seems to be the theme.

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...