If the dems can't manage to pass what they promised, they will for sure lose seats in the midterm.

[bongsaway]

It's time to shit or get off the pot. Put up or shut up. Walk the walk.

As a senior citizen not much that happens in washington will affect me greatly unless the republicans successfully go after social security and medicare and dismantle both. With that said I am of the mind there is a battle going on in america between good and evil, greed and compassion. Sorta' like in the book 'the stand' where the two opposing parties are on different sides of the rockies. One side wants power and control and the other side wants a society for all.

Sadly my opinion is if the dems do not pass what they promised, we will be living in a country that is only interested in power and control and we'll deserve it for our own inactions.

And then they finally came for me.

 

[CaughtInThe]

that's what Republicans are praying for.

to them anyway, it's not about infrastructure. it's about power.

 

[Craig234]

that's what Republicans are praying for.

to them anyway, it's not about infrastructure. it's about power.

And the pro-wealth donors who Senima and Manchin are loyal to.

They don't give a crap if Democrats lose power. I saw reporting this week that for years, Senima has frequently caucused with Republicans. She cares what her pro-wealth donors want, not Democrats or the American people. That's why progressives' tactic might not work, she might prefer nothing to both bills.

 

[Blue Dog]

The GOP was going to win the HoR regardless of what the Democratic Party did.

That being said, it would have behooved them to pass this legislation before walking out the door.

 

[STUT]

If they dont pass infrastructure/reconciliation, then they deserve to lose Congress. Whats the point of having power if you're not going to use it to address things that are urgently needed? All of the grassroots organization and turnout for Dem control of Congress will have been wasted because a small number of Corporatists were squeamish about doing big things...

 

[MamboDervish]

If the dems can't manage to pass what they promised, they will for sure lose seats in the midterm.​

OR - they will gain seats in the midterm as the electorate, who favors infrastructure and climate policies, will see that more Democrats will be required in both Houses in order to achieve those forward looking goals.

 

[noonereal]

If the dems can't manage to pass what they promised, they will for sure lose seats in the midterm.​

I do not understand this logic.

Biden was elected because he was a centrist. The Dems rejected the liberals among them.

In very liberal districts, no GQP will be elected. Whoever the DEms put forward will be elected.

In the swing districts, folks do not want 3.5 trillion in giveaways. They will be happier to just get an infrastructure bill or nothing than the crazy 3.5 pay for other people's kids crap.

And just who was it that promised what? Warren? She was not elected. Bernie, he was not elected. See?

 

[Callen]

I agree, if they can't get the hard infrastructure bill done they are toast and they flushed their President with them. Time to grow up kids and see what governing really means. It's clear that Manchin isn't willing to start any type of negotiations or debate on the human infrastructure bill until 2022 ( although I'm quite getting why ). There is zero excuse for not getting Biden's agenda passed.

I saw reporting this week that for years, Senima has frequently caucused with Republicans

I saw a short bio on her yesterday and I was shocked by it. She started political life as very left of centre progressive with the Green Party and moved a little bit more to the centre as she ascended from State, to Federal politics. She was a fierce proponent of LBGT rights and is also openly bisexual....something I never knew.

 

[Craig234]

I saw a short bio on her yesterday and I was shocked by it. She started political life as very left of centre progressive with the Green Party and moved a little bit more to the centre as she ascended from State, to Federal politics. She was a fierce proponent of LBGT rights and is also openly bisexual....something I never knew.

And it was reported she's still a strong advocate for climate protection. But she appears to have become totally supplicant to the plutocrats.

 

[Craig234]

OR - they will gain seats in the midterm as the electorate, who favors infrastructure and climate policies, will see that more Democrats will be required in both Houses in order to achieve those forward looking goals.

It'd be nice if it worked that way. But the people who didn't vote for them before aren't saying 'boy, we should vote for them so they get the agenda we didn't vote for before done'.

 

[Taylor]

There are just too many ultra-leftists in the party for Democrats to pass a reasonable bill. Infrastructure isn't about universal preschool and union benefits.

"Our infrastructure is crumbling! If we don't act now to install tampon dispensers in Men's Rooms across the country, we're doomed!"

 

[MamboDervish]

It'd be nice if it worked that way. But the people who didn't vote for them before aren't saying 'boy, we should vote for them so they get the agenda we didn't vote for before done'.

Naturally. Nor are the people who voted for them before going to vote against them. The swing in representation hinges on how well the message is carried by those who are running. As in, "Did you vote for Biden or not? If you voted for Biden, then vote for his policies, which polls already show you are in favor of. You can only get the policies you're in favor of if you put less obstructionists in the Legislative Branch - so vote more Republicans out of office."

It's not a complicated message, it just has to be properly framed and presented.

 

[Callen]

And it was reported she's still a strong advocate for climate protection. But she appears to have become totally supplicant to the plutocrats.

I think she is a rather enigmatic person. Would love to know what the three chats with Biden were about and I would love to hear her actually address the issues.....as Roy Orbison would say "She is a Mystery Girl"

 

[Craig234]

Naturally. Nor are the people who voted for them before going to vote against them. The swing in representation hinges on how well the message is carried by those who are running. As in, "Did you vote for Biden or not? If you voted for Biden, then vote for his policies, which polls already show you are in favor of. You can only get the policies you're in favor of if you put less obstructionists in the Legislative Branch - so vote more Republicans out of office."

Bill Clinton won, and tried to pass healthcare. He failed. He could use more Democrats - and voters gave Democrats a huge loss. Obama was elected, and passed the ACA, but had to weaken it a lot without enough votes, and needed more Democrats. Voters gave Democrats the worst mid-term in 62 years. Both of rewarded Republicans with obstruction with control of Congress. So history doesn't suggest voters do what you're suggesting.

 

[Craig234]

I think she is a rather enigmatic person. Would love to know what the three chats with Biden were about and I would love to hear her actually address the issues.....as Roy Orbison would say "She is a Mystery Girl"

Not so much. Senators usually spend summer break in their districts; she spent it as an intern at a California winery owned by a "private equity baron", where she held fundraisers for herself and a pro-rich PAC that is behind opposition to the Build Back Better bill. She has said she will not support any reversals of the Republican tax cuts for the wealthy. Not much mystery. Corruption for the wealthy friends she has made.

 

[Callen]

Not so much. Senators usually spend summer break in their districts; she spent it as an intern at a California winery owned by a "private equity baron", where she held fundraisers for herself and a pro-rich PAC that is behind opposition to the Build Back Better bill. She has said she will not support any reversals of the Republican tax cuts for the wealthy. Not much mystery. Corruption for the wealthy friends she has made.

Didn't know that. Where is it that she said she would not support any of the tax reversals for the wealthy? If that is truly her stance I can see her winning her Senate seat again...unless of course, she runs as a Republican and her core values on LBGT rights and the environment don't seem to support that. She is still a bit of a mystery to me.

 

[Craig234]

Didn't know that. Where is it that she said she would not support any of the tax reversals for the wealthy?

Sinema Will Oppose Any Tax Hikes on Wealthy and Corporations - Progressive Hub

In possibly her most overt show of fealty to rich donors yet, Sinema says she will oppose any tax hikes on top earners and companies.

progressivehub.net

 

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

It's time to shit or get off the pot. Put up or shut up. Walk the walk.

As a senior citizen not much that happens in washington will affect me greatly unless the republicans successfully go after social security and medicare and dismantle both. With that said I am of the mind there is a battle going on in america between good and evil, greed and compassion. Sorta' like in the book 'the stand' where the two opposing parties are on different sides of the rockies. One side wants power and control and the other side wants a society for all.

Sadly my opinion is if the dems do not pass what they promised, we will be living in a country that is only interested in power and control and we'll deserve it for our own inactions.

And then they finally came for me.

Dem's don't care about passing stuff ! They just care about having power !
Remember back in 2010 Obama and Biden had a "SUPER MAJORITY" ! They DID NOT pass all the
crazy crap they were promising the Greedy DEM voters !...

Your understanding of the DEM&REPS is based on Propaganda !

As for the DEM's , they are Racist, who use "Victim Groups" / Minorities to gain power to over ride the US Constitution!

Your idea of the Right is correct for the Big Business portion of this group !

What you should understand is that America got it right from the beginning !
If we followed the Constitution, our Society would be the best it could be !
You want the Oppressive Equality that the DEM's have tricked you in to thinking is fair , or good !

Take a look at these two links and think about it. You should have a fundamental shift in your Left/Right beliefs.

Charley Reese's Final Column! - Common Sense Evaluation

Charley Reese’s Final column! A very interesting column. COMPLETELY NEUTRAL. Be sure to Read the Poem at the end… Charley Reese’s final column for the Orlando Sentinel… He was a journalist for 49 years. When he retired, this was HIS LAST COLUMN. Be sure to read the Tax List at the end. This is...

commonsenseevaluation.com

Doesn't "Good Cop, Bad Cop" seem to fit our 2 Parties ?....
Think about it ! America has (effectively) ONLY 2 Parties ! We are half to a 1 Party Country i.e. a Dictatorship.

 

[MamboDervish]

Bill Clinton won, and tried to pass healthcare. He failed. He could use more Democrats - and voters gave Democrats a huge loss. Obama was elected, and passed the ACA, but had to weaken it a lot without enough votes, and needed more Democrats. Voters gave Democrats the worst mid-term in 62 years. Both of rewarded Republicans with obstruction with control of Congress. So history doesn't suggest voters do what you're suggesting.

? What I'm suggesting is proper messaging. What voters do is dependent on that. What voters want, they've repeatedly told us through polling.

Bill Clinton made healthcare reform one of his top issues in 1993. He got reelected to a second term. Barack Obama passed the ACA in his first term - and then he got reelected. There are more factors in play than voters "rewarding" republicans just to obstruct a Democrat president's agenda. If their intention was really to obstruct a Democrat president, they did a lousy job by reelecting them.

 

[Craig234]

Bill Clinton made healthcare reform one of his top issues in 1993. He got reelected to a second term. Barack Obama passed the ACA in his first term - and then he got reelected. There are more factors in play than voters "rewarding" republicans just to obstruct a Democrat president's agenda. If their intention was really to obstruct a Democrat president, they did a lousy job by reelecting them.

The relevant issue here is what happened to their parties in the mid-terms. President tend to get re-elected. Even Bush did. Even trump came within 44,000 votes of it despite all his problems including the pandemic.

 

[MamboDervish]

The relevant issue here is what happened to their parties in the mid-terms. President tend to get re-elected.

Some do - some don't.

Even Bush did. Even trump came within 44,000 votes of it despite all his problems including the pandemic.

Depends on how you look at it. Trump didn't even get within 6,000,000 votes.
Trump was trounced.

 

[Craig234]

Some do - some don't.

Depends on how you look at it. Trump didn't even get within 6,000,000 votes.
Trump was trounced.

Of the last several - trump Bush 41 no, Obama Bush 43 Clinton Reagan yes. trump lost the popular vote by that many, but just 44,000 votes changing would have given him a win.

 

[MamboDervish]

Of the last several - trump Bush 41 no, Obama Bush 43 Clinton Reagan yes. trump lost the popular vote by that many, but just 44,000 votes changing would have given him a win.

I'm pretty sure I grasp the math as well as you do.

 

[Craig234]

I'm pretty sure I grasp the math as well as you do.

OK?