• 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!

Bernie calls for vote on BBB, and smaller bill if needed. He's right.

I'm sure it's has something to do with wanting to protect the the honor and dignity of your corporate messiahs.
Strange post. Your posts make me cringe. Out there.

Arrogance is cringeworthy, which is the point that flew over your head. Funny how arrogance makes one stupid, no?
 
Yes Bernie Sanders the older gentleman who is sharp as a tack, seems is still an agile individual, always knows what he is talking about and was scaring the hell out of the Trump BS re-election team as well as
the DNC. The man with the smart approach.

Let's get on with it if for no other reason to keep the ALEC/GOP anti american no votes in the news. I love it.

Let's see.....Elizabeth Warren should replace Chuck Schumer!
AOC should replace Pelosi!

And Trump, the Oath Keepers and all of the elected officials that actively participated in any fashion putting the insurrection together should be transferred to the nearest hard time prison. = Cleaning the swamp a little bit more.

Standing Ovation for Bernie Sanders!!!!!
FAz3.gif
 
Good plan, if the GOP agrees not to filibuster each individual piece and instead allows the Senate to vote on each one.

The idea of a huge spending bill (filled with pork) is what killed this bill for the Republicans. If it is split up and each issue lives or dies on it's own merit, the Republicans will have no choice but to support the more moderate parts of the bill. I agree that the Democrats were serious about this bill passing, they just wanted something to complain about.
 
Let's have the news be "Republicans voted against middle class popular programs" instead of "Democrats didn't get it passed".
Well .. unfortunately for you ... Democrats have sucked at getting anything passed .. BBB, budget and other legislative work. Fortunately, we have elections in less than 10 months, many (15 - 20+) Democrats are not seeking reelection and it's going to be a beautiful November. Democrats are just scrambling now to "pass something .."
 
The idea of a huge spending bill (filled with pork) is what killed this bill for the Republicans. If it is split up and each issue lives or dies on it's own merit, the Republicans will have no choice but to support the more moderate parts of the bill. I agree that the Democrats were serious about this bill passing, they just wanted something to complain about.

Unfortunately that's the exact opposite of the logic here. In a world of universal filibustering, reconciliation bills like this (which can't be filibustered) are the only vehicle for moving policy. So by necessity they get loaded up with every policy the party has interest in passing precisely because they represent the only realistic shot of getting something done.

The Dems would be more than happy to hold separate votes on lowering prescription drug costs, making child care more affordable, etc. But such legislation would never get to a vote in the Senate because the GOP will filibuster them, as they do everything. So mega-bills doing all of it at the same time are what we get.
 
If either side would pass a bill limiting drug costs (and just this), every member of congress would HAVE to vote for it. They would be voted out (Dem or Rep) if they went against it. The reason it doesn't get put out there is that BOTH sides have bene paid off by Big Pharm and are in their pockets.

Many of you guys are pretending that the Democratic Party is FOR THE PEOPLE. You are being played.
 
I agree that this was too large of a bill. It should be broken up into pieces, each should then be voted on it's separate merits.
What you don't seem to understand is that the filibuster is used to obstruct anything, and it has an exception for one "reconciliation" bill a year to get passed for budget items, so they need to put it all in that. If they break it up, they can pass one part. So breaking it up is a much worse option with no way to pass more than one or two parts with 50 votes, others needing 60.
 
The idea of a huge spending bill (filled with pork) is what killed this bill for the Republicans. If it is split up and each issue lives or dies on it's own merit, the Republicans will have no choice but to support the more moderate parts of the bill. I agree that the Democrats were serious about this bill passing, they just wanted something to complain about.
Totally false. It has nothing to do with being a "huge spending bill" - seen the far larger military spending bill passed. It has nothing to do with "pork", it doesn't have "pork" - for pork again seen the military spending they approved. The rest of your post is clueless also.
 
If either side would pass a bill limiting drug costs (and just this), every member of congress would HAVE to vote for it. They would be voted out (Dem or Rep) if they went against it. The reason it doesn't get put out there is that BOTH sides have bene paid off by Big Pharm and are in their pockets.

You sure like being wrong. A big part of big pharma profits is because Republicans PASSED a ban on Medicare negotiating drug prices at all under Bush with Medicare Part D - a corrupt giveaway of hundreds of billions a year to big pharma because the industry was the #1 Republican donor at the time.

It did not cause 'every Republican to vote against it', and they did not get voted out because of it. All they had to do was yell things like 'terrorism' and 'gay marriage' and 'guns', just as now all they have to do is yell 'BLM' and 'CRT' and 'guns' and 'immigrants' and whatever.

Progressives are strongly against the corruption with big pharma. There is a clear choice.

Many of you guys are pretending that the Democratic Party is FOR THE PEOPLE. You are being played.

Wrong. Democrats ARE, and especially the progressives who got the rest of the party to support far more FOR THE PEOPLE.
 
Stunt, nothing more nothing less.

Democrats and Sanders know they do not have the votes to pass as is, yet they want a floor vote so they have something new to weaponize.
And in the mean time, we still have high prices on everything, supply chain problems and crime spikes.
 
And in the mean time, we still have high prices on everything, supply chain problems and crime spikes.
So what you're saying is, you're against the economic effect of Coronavirus (then vote for Democrats instead of the pro-virus Republicans), supply chain problems (then you're against the businesses who helped cause that and the virus), and crime spikes (state and local governments are in charge of anti-crime policing, you apparently don't like the incompetent Republican state governments.).
 
Don't see anything to disagree with in his comments. That the supposed conversations with Manchin and Senima are a waste of time to continue and there should be votes and that despite some great results Democratic voters are displeased with the results from the two blocking the Democratic agenda.

Great, let's pump another trillion into the economy.
The unskilled workers won't need free child care when their jobs are eliminated with a future recession and a flood of unskilled labor from the south.
 
The Republican Party is working overtime to suppress the vote and undermine American democracy.​

That is the first sentence of Sanders' screed. It is an outright lie. Should I expect anything else in that screed to be the truth?

I don't think so.
Doesn't the left realize people are tired of their catch phrases. You disagree with the left you are either a racist or are undermining democracy or both.
 
Totally false. It has nothing to do with being a "huge spending bill" - seen the far larger military spending bill passed. It has nothing to do with "pork", it doesn't have "pork" - for pork again seen the military spending they approved. The rest of your post is clueless also.

Just wondering... The Military bill was $731B, the BBB was $1.9T. By what measure is the military budget "far larger"?
 
Great, let's pump another trillion into the economy.
The unskilled workers won't need free child care when their jobs are eliminated with a future recession and a flood of unskilled labor from the south.
$100b a year for ten years is quite doable.

Your feigned panic attack is laughable.
 
Everyone should note the Bernie Sanders fan applauding the idea of when and when not to apply Senate process, said another way situation ethics.
 
Let's have the news be "Republicans voted against middle class popular programs" instead of "Democrats didn't get it passed".
It would tie perfectly with what I think would be a great national slogan for D's in 2022? 'What are the R's in favor of?'
 
It would tie perfectly with what I think would be a great national slogan for D's in 2022? 'What are the R's in favor of?'
I think that's actually weak - R propagandists are perfectly able to come up with an answer (remember "repeal and replace" when there was no "replace"), and it doesn't say what Democrats are for. Remember how Republicans were 'for' things like fiscal responsibility as they cut taxes for rich by trillions and added it all to the debt.
 
Just wondering... The Military bill was $731B, the BBB was $1.9T. By what measure is the military budget "far larger"?
The military bill was for one year. The BBB amount was for 10 years. But the fact you ask makes another point, how effective propaganda attacks on BBB were by using the 10 year figure to make it sound like massive spending.
 
I think that's actually weak - R propagandists are perfectly able to come up with an answer (remember "repeal and replace" when there was no "replace"), and it doesn't say what Democrats are for. Remember how Republicans were 'for' things like fiscal responsibility as they cut taxes for rich by trillions and added it all to the debt.
D's can't say what they are for, because they don't have any heft on that claim. Are D's for voting rights? Really, how can you tell?
 
D's can't say what they are for, because they don't have any heft on that claim. Are D's for voting rights? Really, how can you tell?
That's ridiculous. D's are for voting rights because they advocate for them, and wrote strong bills for them, and passed them in the House, and 48 of 50 Democratic Senators support them enough to override the filibuster to pass them, and they're a top Biden priority. Not having enough Democrats elected doesn't mean Democrats are not for what they lack the votes to pass. Two bad Democrats don't represent the party.
 
Is Bernie ready to retire with his millions yet?

The guy really should hang up his hat and go on to lecturing at a college.

His usefulness in government is done.
 
Back
Top Bottom