• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

‘Your credibility... will die in this room’

JasperL said:
Yes, that's common as dirt, and is a regular feature of every major bill passed since the founding I expect. The members of Congress compromise with each other to get something done. It's politics, nothing unusual or even unsavory about that process as a concept.

The point is the ACA passed through regular order in the Congress. It cleared the House then overcame a filibuster in the Senate and so received 60 votes in favor on that side, then was signed by Obama. There's nothing unique or extraordinary about that. McConnell's Senate "rammed through" all kinds of legislation on party-line votes, many more confirmations were "rammed through" the same way.
Click to expand...

Not to mention they spent nine months on it. Nine quite public months of debate and revision, in five Congressional committees of jurisdiction, in numerous presidential and Congressional town halls with the public, in the media, and in weeks of floor debate.
 
Greenbeard said:
Not to mention they spent nine months on it. Nine quite public months of debate and revision, in five Congressional committees of jurisdiction, in numerous presidential and Congressional town halls with the public, in the media, and in weeks of floor debate.
Click to expand...

I think history will view Trump as nothing more than a violent and temporary reaction to Obama's presidency (and being the first black man in the White House

In many way that's all Trump did - worked to undo everything Obama worked so hard to create for the country.
 
Rich2018 said:
It's not (from Biden)

It (packing the court) does however remain an option



I don't think any Democrat senators would vote against Biden on this

However the issue won't come to a head if the returns sensible rulings. If the SC were to (hypothetically) overturn Wade V Roe (abortion issue, and other contentious issues) then "packing the court" will become an increasingly viable option for Biden



I suspect that is because you're not a Democrat
For a bankrupt agenda, bereft of any imagination or ambition, you need look no further that what Trump offered America




I don't

I want to see the Democrats working together with a positive agenda, and not be defined in negative ambitions, as the Republicans have been for a generation or more.
Click to expand...


To pack the court, the Dems would need to add 4 libs. That, IMO, is not realistic and thus packing the court not much of an option in remain.

I say what I do about Manchin because of what Manchin has said:

‘ “I commit to tonight and I commit to all of your viewers and everyone else who is watching, I want to allay those fears, I want to rest those fears for you right now because when they talk about, whether it be packing the courts or ending the filibuster, I will not vote to do that,” Manchin said.’

(see 6th para):
Democrat Senator Manchin Vows to Vote With GOP on Court-packing - The New American

Manchin voted for Kavanaugh.

Manchin votes favor Trump a majority of the time.

Manchin is self-professed “pro-life” and will not commit to stating he is against overturning Roe v Wade.

The evidence supports what I say, not what you can have no evidence to support.

Overturning Roe v Wade could lead to more Dems in both Houses and a greater likelihood of either packing the court or passing stronger woman’s rights legislation. As it is now, Dems do not have the votes.

That I believe in Western Liberalism is why I say what I do about the pretentious, do-nothing Dems. Or, you cite all they’ve demonstrated how they’ve supported liberal/progressive/pro-avg American cause. They’re messaging stinks.

The Trump/Republican agenda is bankrupt and corrupt in favor of the rich and large corps. The Dems have no agenda, known cause or vision successfully communicated.

You say you want to see the Dems working together with a positive agenda because they haven’t, which is why you want them to. I do too. You say you don’t want Dems defined in negative ambitions, as the Reps have been successfully doing for a generation or more, because the Dems have failed to define themselves positively and have let the Reps run all over them. Same here. So, I say I don’t see them doing that, meaning by their own volition, because they haven’t been for many yrs, as you admit, yet you disagree with me. You contradict yourself. Or, you might clarify what you say. Dems don’t do anything until they are forced to by the people they are supposed to lead, not be pushed, to progress.
 
bluesmoke said:
To pack the court, the Dems would need to add 4 libs. That, IMO, is not realistic and thus packing the court not much of an option in remain.

I say what I do about Manchin because of what Manchin has said:

‘ “I commit to tonight and I commit to all of your viewers and everyone else who is watching, I want to allay those fears, I want to rest those fears for you right now because when they talk about, whether it be packing the courts or ending the filibuster, I will not vote to do that,” Manchin said.’
Click to expand...

So you're saying that the Democrats would need a majority of 2 ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom