• 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!

McConnell's Legislative Graveyard Continues

Luckyone said:
No one has a right to complain when for 20 years you set the ruled of the playing field (like McConnell did) and then the same set of rules he set up are used against him. That is only fair.
Click to expand...

Who gives a @$%k what's "fair"?

Jesus. I'm talking about getting things done. Screw fair. Nobody cares about fair. What they care about is that the people they pay to represent them sit down and engage with the other side. If that takes engagement and deal-making, great. But if it takes a knee to the nuts, then that's just as good. Only thing is, they're far better than we are are at the latter... that's why I figure it's a far better strategy for us to adopt the former. It has the virtue of not having been tried in a while.
 
Roadvirus said:
Democrats don't believe in compromising where their Far Left agenda is concerned.
Click to expand...

You think the Republicans are any better when it comes to the Far Right's agenda? Say what you will about us, but we don't demand blind loyalty to defeated former Presidents. During the Reagan Administration, I can't recall all that many Democrats getting their marching orders from Jimmy Carter.
 
Cordelier said:
Who gives a @$%k what's "fair"?

Jesus. I'm talking about getting things done. Screw fair. Nobody cares about fair. What they care about is that the people they pay to represent them sit down and engage with the other side. If that takes engagement and deal-making, great. But if it takes a knee to the nuts, then that's just as good. Only thing is, they're far better than we are are at the latter... that's why I figure it's a far better strategy for us to adopt the former. It has the virtue of not having been tried in a while.
Click to expand...
What you propose doesn't actually get anything done and the proof is found in people having already done this. What, you think "try to compromise" is some stunning new strategy nobody else thought up? They've done it. They've tried. It's not working.
 
Deuce said:
What you propose doesn't actually get anything done and the proof is found in people having already done this. What, you think "try to compromise" is some stunning new strategy nobody else thought up? They've done it. They've tried. It's not working.
Click to expand...

No they haven't. They've made lip service about compromise... but that's all it was. Like I said from the get-go, if you want to get your programs passed, you have to set the ground work. It can't just be a one-time thing on some Administration priority where they try to pick off some stray Republican vote. It has to be a day-in and day-out effort to build the kind of coalitions you need. Like establishing a running game in Football - you've just got to keep pounding out those 2 and 3 yard gains.
 
Cordelier said:
No they haven't. They've made lip service about compromise... but that's all it was. Like I said from the get-go, if you want to get your programs passed, you have to set the ground work. It can't just be a one-time thing on some Administration priority where they try to pick off some stray Republican vote. It has to be a day-in and day-out effort to build the kind of coalitions you need. Like establishing a running game in Football - you've just got to keep pounding out those 2 and 3 yard gains.
Click to expand...
Cordelier said:
Who gives a @$%k what's "fair"?
Click to expand...
You ever studied any game theory? You should.
 
Cordelier said:
Who gives a @$%k what's "fair"?

Jesus. I'm talking about getting things done. Screw fair. Nobody cares about fair. What they care about is that the people they pay to represent them sit down and engage with the other side. If that takes engagement and deal-making, great. But if it takes a knee to the nuts, then that's just as good. Only thing is, they're far better than we are are at the latter... that's why I figure it's a far better strategy for us to adopt the former. It has the virtue of not having been tried in a while.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, reality is that when you have a group of people trying to work with each other, someone always is the leader and sets the rules and when that leader has screwed you for 20 years, the first thought is always to screw back.

It is not intelligent, it is not right, and it isn't fair but we are talking about human nature and that is one thing that words will never have an effect.

When someone hits you repeatedly, the first action is to hit back. Are you different in that way? You let people screw you over and over again and when it is your turn at bat, you do not hit back?
 
Luckyone said:
Unfortunately, reality is that when you have a group of people trying to work with each other, someone always is the leader and sets the rules and when that leader has screwed you for 20 years, the first thought is always to screw back.

It is not intelligent, it is not right, and it isn't fair but we are talking about human nature and that is one thing that words will never have an effect.

When someone hits you repeatedly, the first action is to hit back. Are you different in that way? You let people screw you over and over again and when it is your turn at bat, you do not hit back?
Click to expand...

Maybe I just look at things differently? When someone beats me, I usually just try to up my game next time around. Ideally, on the ground of my choosing instead of his.
 
Cordelier said:
You think the Republicans are any better when it comes to the Far Right's agenda? Say what you will about us, but we don't demand blind loyalty to defeated former Presidents. During the Reagan Administration, I can't recall all that many Democrats getting their marching orders from Jimmy Carter.
Click to expand...
1649312790697.png​
 
Cordelier said:
Maybe I just look at things differently? When someone beats me, I usually just try to up my game next time around. Ideally, on the ground of my choosing instead of his.
Click to expand...
That is great but when you are playing in the other person's stadium and with their rules, upping your game does not work. It is like what is happening in Russia, you can fight all you want and even be better at something (Ukrainians are better fighters) but you are playing an overwhelming force that is killing everyone in their path.
 
Cordelier said:
On I'm not talking bribes. I'm talking about getting bipartisan bills to the floor. Like S. 3047 - The Veterans Pro Bono Corps Act of 2021, designed "To establish a pilot program to support medical residency and fellowship programs that assist veterans, and for other purposes." It was originally sponsored by Senators Portman and Sinema back in November of last year, and it has been co-sponsored by Senators Blackburn (R-TN), Hassan (D-TN), Van Hollen (D-MD) and Warnock (D-GA). That's about as bi-partisan a group as you're ever going to find. So why has it been languishing in Veterans' Affairs ever since? It ought to easily pass the Senate and the House.
Click to expand...
It got a hearing in the Veterans’ Affairs committee a few months ago and the witnesses from both the VFW and the VA testified against that piece of legislation (a third panelist, from Disabled American Veterans, raised substantive questions about the bill, but the organization took no formal position on the legislation, declining to endorse it).
 
Luckyone said:
That is great but when you are playing in the other person's stadium and with their rules, upping your game does not work. It is like what is happening in Russia, you can fight all you want and even be better at something (Ukrainians are better fighters) but you are playing an overwhelming force that is killing everyone in their path.
Click to expand...

What's your alternative, then? Throw up your arms and give up? Just declare Congress permanently adjourned and run the country by executive fiat?

If we go down the same road as the so-called Republican party has gone, and adopt the same tactics, then our republic is doomed. Someone has got to stand up for it if it's going to keep on working.
 
Cordelier said:
What's your alternative, then? Throw up your arms and give up? Just declare Congress permanently adjourned and run the country by executive fiat?

If we go down the same road as the so-called Republican party has gone, and adopt the same tactics, then our republic is doomed. Someone has got to stand up for it if it's going to keep on working.
Click to expand...
No, you don't give up. You fight. Nonetheless, the point I made that you disputed is that the answer is "upping up your game". Yes, that is a good option but not necessarily something that will accomplish a win. There have to be changes made to this "now overwhelming lack of caring for the people" Republican party. They have to change or get out of the stadium.
 
Greenbeard said:
It got a hearing in the Veterans’ Affairs committee a few months ago and the witnesses from both the VFW and the VA testified against that piece of legislation (a third panelist, from Disabled American Veterans, raised substantive questions about the bill, but the organization took no formal position on the legislation, declining to endorse it).
Click to expand...

I know the committee looked at 21 bills during those hearings, and 13 of those made it out of committee.... but out of the 8 that didn't, the Baldwin/Sullivan bill (S. 2405) and Portman/Sinema (S. 3047) seemed to have pretty broad support. Who knows? Maybe there was good reason to block them? Maybe the opposition of veterans' groups was a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good? Or maybe the fix is in against Sinema? The other bill she co-authored - that one with Rubio (S. 2329) - also got stuck in committee, although unlike the Portman/Sinema bill, that one never garnered any additional support.
 
Luckyone said:
No, you don't give up. You fight. Nonetheless, the point I made that you disputed is that the answer is "upping up your game". Yes, that is a good option but not necessarily something that will accomplish a win. There have to be changes made to this "now overwhelming lack of caring for the people" Republican party. They have to change or get out of the stadium.
Click to expand...

Why would they do that, though? It's pretty obvious that what they're doing is working for them... if they're not paying a price for it at the ballot box, then why should they change?

My thought is that people have gotten so used to all of the partisan rancor and gridlock that it's what they expect now.... what we need to do is find a way to adjust their expectations. It's like the Civil Rights Bill of 1957... sure, it was watered down to point of meaninglessness.... but that wasn't the point. The point is that nobody ever expected it to pass at all. They got used to Civil Rights bill after Civil Rights bills being defeated by Southern intransigence. The general consensus was that this one was going to go the same way... but it didn't, and it's passage meant the door was open for bigger and better Civil Rights legislation down the road. The expectations were adjusted upwards, and that made all the difference.
 
HangLow said:
Click to expand...

I don't dispute your list... but my point is this... if they're pulling away to the right just for the sake of pulling away to the right, then why aren't we doing everything we can to seize the ground in the middle that they've ceded?
 
Cordelier said:
Why would they do that, though? It's pretty obvious that what they're doing is working for them... if they're not paying a price for it at the ballot box, then why should they change?

My thought is that people have gotten so used to all of the partisan rancor and gridlock that it's what they expect now.... what we need to do is find a way to adjust their expectations. It's like the Civil Rights Bill of 1957... sure, it was watered down to point of meaninglessness.... but that wasn't the point. The point is that nobody ever expected it to pass at all. They got used to Civil Rights bill after Civil Rights bills being defeated by Southern intransigence. The general consensus was that this one was going to go the same way... but it didn't, and it's passage meant the door was open for bigger and better Civil Rights legislation down the road. The expectations were adjusted upwards, and that made all the difference.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you are 100% right but that is like saying that the people of Ukraine will get accustomed to the killings. It is still 100% wrong and no matter if it is working for them, they are not helping the nation. They are only helping themselves and even then, they are giving up on all the things that actually make life worthwhile (morals, ethics, principles and humanity). Without those, all you are doing is enjoying money and flesh. Is like worth living is money and flesh are the only things that you can get?
 
Luckyone said:
Yeah, you are 100% right but that is like saying that the people of Ukraine will get accustomed to the killings. It is still 100% wrong and no matter if it is working for them, they are not helping the nation. They are only helping themselves and even then, they are giving up on all the things that actually make life worthwhile (morals, ethics, principles and humanity). Without those, all you are doing is enjoying money and flesh. Is like worth living is money and flesh are the only things that you can get?
Click to expand...

I don't even think it's venality... I think they honestly don't want the Federal Government to work. They want to throw so much sand in the gears that the Federal Government will be forced to give up and just let the States handle pretty much everything.
 
Cordelier said:
I don't even think it's venality... I think they honestly don't want the Federal Government to work. They want to throw so much sand in the gears that the Federal Government will be forced to give up and just let the States handle pretty much everything.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the "Disunited" States of America.

Sigh, it never ceases to amaze me at the utter stupidity of people. Doesn't anyone understand that nothing is ever going to be perfect so trying for perfection is useless? We have been "good enough" for many many years but that has just not been good enough for them. Well, we do know that when you think that way, the reality is that you either achieve perfection or go bust and we all know that perfection is impossible, so it will be bust if they get their wishes
 
Luckyone said:
Yeah, the "Disunited" States of America.

Sigh, it never ceases to amaze me at the utter stupidity of people. Doesn't anyone understand that nothing is ever going to be perfect so trying for perfection is useless? We have been "good enough" for many many years but that has just not been good enough for them. Well, we do know that when you think that way, the reality is that you either achieve perfection or go bust and we all know that perfection is impossible, so it will be bust if they get their wishes
Click to expand...

Just because they disagree with you doesn't mean they're wrong, though. Obviously it doesn't mean they're right either... but there's got to be give-and-take. That's the only way to sort out who has the stronger case.
 
Cordelier said:
Just because they disagree with you doesn't mean they're wrong, though. Obviously it doesn't mean they're right either... but there's got to be give-and-take. That's the only way to sort out who has the stronger case.
Click to expand...
I never in my entire lifetime see any team win with one person alone. As great as Michael Jordan was, he would not have won any titles by himself. Brady, the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom