Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Joe Manchin - spinning heads (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe Mammy
- Start date
jm192
Footballguy
I guess I'm not really sure of the outrage.
Has someone shown something that 400$ is the magic number?
I feel like if the Dem proposal was 300$ a week until July, people would be praising them for taking care of Americans.
People complain about the lack of bipartisanship and Manchin is doing it. And instead of praising it, "what a victory."
Has someone shown something that 400$ is the magic number?
I feel like if the Dem proposal was 300$ a week until July, people would be praising them for taking care of Americans.
People complain about the lack of bipartisanship and Manchin is doing it. And instead of praising it, "what a victory."
I would have preferred $400, but in general, I think Joe Manchin is great and Democrats should try to elect more people like him -- i.e., people who can win red states even with D's after their names.
I perfer the AOC wing has their way and knocks these types out of the party. Then the D's will be returned to minority status in the House and Senate as they belong.
Apple Jack
Footballguy
Most powerful Senator right now. No one would blink an eye if he switched parties and shifted the majority. If there’s something he wants, he can get either party to give it to him. The GOP would be threatening to primary him to keep in line. It’s not a bad thing to have a few Senators on each side that aren’t guaranteed to be automatic party line votes.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
The left (TYT) are already promising to primary him.
The democratic socialists wing does not care. The Demicrat party won't, but the far left can raise enough cash to provide a challenger despite whay the DNC wants.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
We should probably bring this up in the Democrat Civil War thread I started a couple weeks ago. Seems like a good place for it because the far-left wing of the Democrat Party grows larger every election. First there was Bernie, then came Warren and then "The Squad" - and that's all within the last decade (except Bernie).
They (the far left) will be vying for power or taking over within the next decade. The Democrat Party will need to change from a "(D)" to an "(S)" after their names.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
Rather simple from my point of view, though "outrage" isn't the word I'd use to describe my feelings. This is yet another example of alleged "sticker shock" (WOW!!!! 2 trillion dollars?!?!?!?!?! We can't do that!!!!!!) and they decide to take it from the people and not the pork. It's pathetic and they all went along with it.
Though it does shine a light on how stupid the "but 'socialism' OMG!!!!!" shtick is. The party, right now, is more center than the GOP could ever imagine being which is kind of "funny".
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
See the problem with this is that in the Democratic Party, the centrists and moderates and establishment are winning the struggle. They consistently get their way in the end.
Yet in the Republican Party, the extremists are winning the struggle.
And until this changes, Democrats are going to continue to win the big elections.
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
I agree. Wish the GOP had people that could win blue states even with an R to balance things out. Would like to see more middle governing and working for all people. That is why I was hoping John James would have won Michigan. Think he would have been good.
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner
Footballguy
You won ONE election. The previous 4 years it was all GOP.
Your statement makes no sense. It's the type of statement I saw, for example, in 2006 when the Democrats steamrolled the GOP in the mid-terms. Heck, they were even pronouncing and crowing about an end to the GOP and that they would never take power again. 4 short years later it was all GOP and in 2016, well, I'm sure you remember that "big election win" by Democrats.
Centrist and moderate Democrats are going to be a thing of the past very soon. Get ready for the "(S)" - it's coming. What you're seeing now with cancel culture, wokeness and the growing segment of "(S)" in the Democrat Party is just the beginning. And it's your party that's doing it. And don't worry - they'll be coming for you too once you've outlived your usefulness. We have the entirety of the 20th century to see how that turns out.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Going back over 30 years, the Democrats have won the popular vote in every national election with the sole exception of 2004.
Now, thanks to our electoral college, that doesn’t necessarily translate into Democratic victories every time. But it IS long enough to signify a pattern which is not good for Republicans-Democratic ideas are simply more popular with the public. That’s fact, no getting around it.
Personally I believe Democratic ideas are more popular over these last 3 decades because they have stayed close to the center and avoided leftism, while Republicans during the same time period have moved away from the center and embraced extremism of the right. If that ever changes, and Republicans move back to the center and Democrats too far to the left, then Republicans will become the dominant party again. But in the meantime your false narrative trying to paint Democrats as extreme isn’t going to succeed very far.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Preach.
You can't do anything without power. And something is better than nothing.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Republicans haven't gotten 51% of the popular vote since 1988.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I keep seeing this "popular vote" nonsense. What POTUS has ever been elected by the popular vote?
I think the only false narrative going on in here is yours. You've gotten a proven history of this. You're saying the Democrats aren't going extreme except the last decade proves you entirely wrong. Hey look - a pattern just like you claimed!
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
The first part of this post ignores my point that Democratic ideas are more popular- that what it means to consistently win the popular vote.
The second part of your post I don’t quite understand.
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Sand
Footballguy
He's an effective middle of the road politician. He seems to actually think about situations, which is refreshing.
Totally agree with him on the minimum wage. He indicated 11 was the right number, which is much closer to correct than 7.25 or 15.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
dawgtrails
Footballguy
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
dawgtrails
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand
Footballguy
They won because DJT was toxic. If you look at congressional results you'd conclude the exact opposite.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Dems won 50.8% of the total House vote to 47.7% for Republicans. Republicans do well for structural reasons, not because they have more support in the country.
Republicans did win the popular vote for Senate seats in 2020, but something like 20 of the 33 states with Senate elections were red.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
I’m talking about over the last 30 years- why are Democrats consistently winning the popular vote?
But to answer your question: polls suggest that the main reason Republicans did well in Congress this time around is because they successfully portrayed the Democrats as supporting socialism and and supporting “defund the police”. Both of these were false portrayals in terms of the vast majority of Democrats, yet it worked. People believed the Dems were socialist and wanted to get rid of police, and that made them afraid to vote Democrat. Any winning strategy is by definition an effective strategy, but it’s also a temporary one; such a clearly false portrayal won’t survive among independents and moderates who decide elections for very long.
But it does go to my larger point: the center wins elections in this country. When either political party strays too far out to left or right, the other party wins by default. That’s why, in the big picture, Democrats keep winning, because the Republicans are not in the center. They have moved away from traditional Reagan conservative values toward a desperate attempt to maintain Caucasian male dominance in our society (which is why so much of their focus these days is cultural rather than economic.) Its a bad strategy and a losing one.
Sand
Footballguy
Republicans did well because of geographic reasons. The game is an area control game, not a population game.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Right. Structural, not popular. They can lose by 2-3% of the vote and still win elections because the system we set up was designed to protect small states and slave states.
More Senators outside the populous party of the state would be good for the country. Growing up in SD we had two Democratic senators including the majority leader. Now it’s tough to believe that it will ever happen again.
Desert_Power
Footballguy
And this is a bug, not a feature of American democracy. It's only going to get worse.
The Commish
Footballguy
This is correct. That's why the Dems go that avenue with social safety nets and why the GOP goes that route with tax breaks for the rich. They are promising free to their audience. The trick is to convince the minions that these promises are something other than what they are. Seems to work on a great many of you.
djmich
Footballguy
Think we’ve done this before but taking less from people is not giving them free things.
The Commish
Footballguy
Perhaps "free to their audience" is incorrect. "Boondoggle like vendor booty to their audience" is probably the better way to frame it. If we want to go that route, then we must accept that making a person's tax dollar go further by providing more services for it isn't giving them free things either
I'm game either way....just need to be consistent. That knife cuts both ways in a consumer driven economy. That's why it's my belief that income taxes are the completely wrong way to go about funding our government. ETA: "vote for me and you'll pay less" or "vote for me and I'll give you more" are two sides of the same coin IMO. Label them what you want. They are both bribes to their constituents.
Last edited by a moderator:
