• 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!

Midterms outcome

S

Slavister

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
11,147
Reaction score
8,189
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So how do you imagine next 2 years will compare to previous 2 in terms of accomplishing Dem agenda?

With 51-49 in Senate and with small minority in the House - are Dems now more limited in some aspects but can push through with others?

Can they do something now they could not do before thanks to Manchin, or being minority in the House will stand in the way of all that?
 
Slavister said:
So how do you imagine next 2 years will compare to previous 2 in terms of accomplishing Dem agenda?

With 51-49 in Senate and with small minority in the House - are Dems now more limited in some aspects but can push through with others?

Can they do something now they could not do before thanks to Manchin, or being minority in the House will stand in the way of all that?
Click to expand...
They have a solid excuse to do the nothing they were already going to do.
Don't get me wrong, they were always going to do little or nothing, but now they have an excellent excuse and don't have to sacrifice one of their "moderates" on the alter of public opinion, like Manchin.
 
They can (with a lot of MSM help) blame the coming (soon?) recession on the republicants blocking their ability to pass wondrous new legislation to avert it. ;)
 
The Mark said:
they were always going to do little or nothing
Click to expand...

I disagree. They have tried to pass a lot of laws and got stuck on Manchin and/or Sinema. They DID pass a bunch of others, more limited ones - still a lot.

Examples:

Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (Climate change investments of over $369B, cap of $2k on prescription drug prices for seniors + Medicare ability to negotiate drug pricing)
American Rescue Plan (covid-19, child poverty)
Safer Communities Act (gun control)
CHIPS and Science Act (manufacturing)
Violence Against Women Act

They failed to pass a lot of other more extensive ones though (like voting rights, universal pre-K, etc).
 
Last edited:
Slavister said:
I disagree. They have tried to pass a lot of laws and got stuck on Manchin and/or Sinema. They DID pass a bunch of others, more limited ones - still a lot.
Click to expand...
Let me phrase it differently.
They are unwilling to spend the political capital, and burn the political bridges, necessary to accomplish more than a very little of the stated platform.


I do not believe that getting more done was impossible.
 
Slow Joe will be able to get all his kooky judges approved in the Senate no problem. On the other hand Democrats will find it hard getting their trillion dollar let's print some more money spending bills through the House.
 
Democrats couldn’t push their own agenda through when they controlled both chambers and the presidency. The next two years they will be just as unsuccessful but brainwash their loyal followers into thinking it’s really the other guy’s fault. Its the same song and dance just the lead off foot changes
 
Slavister said:
So how do you imagine next 2 years will compare to previous 2 in terms of accomplishing Dem agenda?

With 51-49 in Senate and with small minority in the House - are Dems now more limited in some aspects but can push through with others?

Can they do something now they could not do before thanks to Manchin, or being minority in the House will stand in the way of all that?
Click to expand...
More judges and cabinet appointments. ambassadors, anything requiring the "advice and conseb=nt of the Senate" will be easier.
 
The Mark said:
They have a solid excuse to do the nothing they were already going to do.
Don't get me wrong, they were always going to do little or nothing, but now they have an excellent excuse and don't have to sacrifice one of their "moderates" on the alter of public opinion, like Manchin.
Click to expand...
Straight up lie.
 
Slavister said:
So how do you imagine next 2 years will compare to previous 2 in terms of accomplishing Dem agenda?

With 51-49 in Senate and with small minority in the House - are Dems now more limited in some aspects but hacan push through with others?

Can they do something now they could not do before thanks to Manchin, or being minority in the House will stand in the way of all that?
Click to expand...
They actually have real majority control in the Senate, including the committees which had a 50/50 split but no longer will. There will be Democratic complete control over agenda, timetables, and rules in thtose committees, and that most matters in confirmations of appointments and in senate committee investigations. Dems can afford to lose either Manchin or Sinema in a floor fight for simple majority, but not both.

However legislation will be virtually impossible to get through two houses and the President. Total stagnation. Nobody gets anything that needs both bodies to act through to the President's desk.
 
The only things that can get done are some solid bipartisan bills. They may be able to get some stuff out of the Senate but I suspect McCarthy will not let it come to the floor. They should still try though because if it's a good solid bill that helps the American people and McCarthy kills it will just help the GOP look worse than their clown show is going to look.

Conversely, McCarthy would be smart to get some solid bills out of the House even if means calling on Democrats to help......but he won't.
 
Callen said:
The only things that can get done are some solid bipartisan bills. They may be able to get some stuff out of the Senate but I suspect McCarthy will not let it come to the floor. They should still try though because if it's a good solid bill that helps the American people and McCarthy kills it will just help the GOP look worse than their clown show is going to look.

Conversely, McCarthy would be smart to get some solid bills out of the House even if means calling on Democrats to help......but he won't.
Click to expand...

That's the thing I am wondering... Is there 5 moderate R's in the House to push through some agenda that did not get through Manchin?
 
Slavister said:
That's the thing I am wondering... Is there 5 moderate R's in the House to push through some agenda that did not get through Manchin?
Click to expand...
I'm not understanding your point as it relates to Manchin. There certainly moderate Republicans in the House .
 
Callen said:
I'm not understanding your point as it relates to Manchin. There certainly moderate Republicans in the House .
Click to expand...

Manchin (and sometimes Sinema) have stood in the way of passing D agenda over the last 2 years. Passed laws had to be watered down significantly due to his (sometimes hers) opposition. Now that Senate has 51 Ds, I wonder if those original laws can be revived and passed without Manchin support... but that now requires at least 5 Rs on the House to join the Ds there... unless I am mistaken.
 
Slavister said:
Manchin (and sometimes Sinema) have stood in the way of passing D agenda over the last 2 years. Passed laws had to be watered down significantly due to his (sometimes hers) opposition. Now that Senate has 51 Ds, I wonder if those original laws can be revived and passed without Manchin support... but that now requires at least 5 Rs on the House to join the Ds there... unless I am mistaken.
Click to expand...
Thanks. There definitely is 5 moderate Republicans in the House but the problem is to get it out of the Senate you need 60 votes unless the Dems used reconciliation to bypass all Republicans. However, if they did that McCarthy would never allow a reconciliation bill to come to the floor ...ever.
 
Democratic Senator Warnock's victory in Georgia has far-reaching implications, beginning with how Republicans feel about the loss.

CNN reports, "GOP senators were noticeably upset about their 2022 problems in the aftermath of their loss in the Georgia Senate runoff, calling for better candidates and contending that former President Donald Trump caused a problem on the trail.

"Here's how some Republicans are reacting after last night.

"Senate GOP Whip John Thune said Trump’s presence on the campaign trail created a contrast when they party wanted to keep the race focused on President Joe Biden and his policies.

“It all starts with quality candidates – there's no substitute for that," Thune said.

"Asked if Trump was a problem for their party, Thune indicated he was," CNN.

"The Dems were in many cases able to turn it into a choice election because of Trump’s presence out there — so was he a factor? I don't think there's any question about that,” he said.

"Thune added that candidates shouldn’t have campaigned on the bogus notion the election was stolen.

“A lot of the candidates who had problems in these elections were running on the 2020 election being stolen, and I don't think independent voters were having it,” he said.

"Sen. Lindsey Graham told CNN that Trump has to prove he can win if he’s to clinch the nomination for 2024."

Note: That is a tall order. Counting the elections in Georgia, the latest involving his hand-picked candidate, Walker, Trump has lost the last five elections.

"He's still very popular in the party. People appreciate his presidency. They appreciate his fighting spirit," Graham said.

I am not at all sure which planet Graham thinks he is on. Maybe he is getting too old for this job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom