No. If RBG doesn’t die we have a better shot at the Senate. As-is, giving Trump the stimulus then may have given him a second term.
On top of it, no time is the right time for corporate liability shields and corporate handouts. But that’s the problem, sticking to their guns on this was correct but so was passing stimulus over and over to frame the election as a vote for stimulus or against it.
Given that eDems don’t actually want to give much/any stimulus, the whole argument is pretty moot. If they’re going to be a shit party that doesn’t fight for the average person one iota, then none of our discussions over what’s right matters.
Yep.
Was 1.8T ever on the table? Certainly not without a liability shield and I doubt with much/any help for state and local governments.
this was from October 9th:
The White House offer includes the following, according to NBC News :
- State and local governments — $300 billion
- Unemployment insurance — $400 per week, through the third week of January and retroactive to Sept. 12
- Liability protection for businesses
- Stimulus checks — $1,200 for adults, $1,000 per child
- Airlines — $20 billion
- PPP loans — $330 billion
- Minority lending — $10 billion
- Testing, tracing, vaccines, and health-care providers — $175 billion
- Education — $150 billion
- Student loan forgiveness — $25 billion
- Food assistance — $15 billion
- Child care — $25 billion
- Postal service — $10 billion
- Employee retention tax credit — $91 billion
- Lodging industry — $20 billion
- Broadband — $15 billion
The WH offer is irrelevant. Mitch was never passing anything, or even voting on it.
1 Like
The obvious play was to keep passing a great stimulus bill and saying, “When the Senate passes a bill, we’ll negotiate. That’s how this works. We’re for helping people, let’s see the Senate put its money where its mouth is.”
But none of this matters because on these issues it’s not good party vs bad party it’s awful steaming pile of shit bad party vs slightly awfuller steaming pile of shit slightly worse party.
It’s the party of wealthy white collar professionals, mid-sized business, big business, and corporate America versus the party of big business and corporate America.
It’s not that eDems are playing to lose and colluding so much as it is that they’re fighting for what they believe in: the gravy train of donations from business.
If people like you aren’t cutting checks for those $25K a plate fundraisers that bundle donations to every candidate for a party, you don’t have a dog in this fight. That’s the reality.
You think Trump would have just sat back and not said shit if him and Nancy came to an agreement? The senate would have to vote on it, and likely would have passed it. Do you not remember how desperate Trump was to get stimulus?
By nancy not agreeing to anything Mitch had an easy out, if Nancy had come to a deal with the WH either Senate votes on it and it passes or they get the big stick from Trump which is even better.
Maybe so but I don’t see Mitch passing a bill that likely would have had more Dem votes than Republican ones.
Do you not see how great that would have been for dems? Trump would have gone fucking ballistic. Also remember dems can force a vote.
1 Like
Why didn’t they just force one on HEROES then?
Thats still a great outcome. Either they pass something, or vote it down, or enrage Trump. All are great outcomes.
To be clear I thought the dems were playing it correctly before the election because I thought they were going to crush the senate, if you don’t think that though then you need to accept the WH 1.8 trillion.
Literally the only reason to not accept the 1.8 politically is if you think it would have let Trump win.
So this is all armchair analysis, I was with you guys before the election, but post election its clear we were very wrong.
That probably would have given Trump the White House. I’d take the deal now that he’s out, but that’s why we can’t get it now.
I hate giving up a liability shield but what difference does it make? We can’t afford to shut down and we can’t trace enough to prove any liability anyway. I’d trade it for real help for the working class, but try to put in a requirement that it’s voided if the business wilfully ignores local regulations on masks/capacity/etc.
But passing that deal in October had to be worth the margin in AZ and GA, which makes it 275-259. It probably gives Trump WI too, and we lose. At best we’re fading shenanigans in one state which means he actually has a shot at the coup.
So would you trade that deal for Trump winning and cementing his rule? I wouldn’t, and that was always the argument.
They’re complicit. Also HEROES wouldn’t have been as politically killer as forcing a vote Trump backed on the senate.
I know nobody wants to admit they’re wrong but how can you guys not see that forcing a vote, or forcing Mitch into not voting on a Trump approved bill, would have been great for dems?
I was wrong too, most of us were. In retrospect accepting the WH deal might have been the only thing to win us the senate. Either that or people get help.
I’m sorry but that guy is actually entirely right to feel abandoned.
3 Likes
They should have forced a vote on HEROES. I think the Trump stimulus bill negotiations were a mirage tbh. Even in some alternate universe where Trump and the Republican senate pass a huge stimmy bill I don’t see how that does anything but give us 4 more years of Trump.
I am obviously very into politics and I just had to go look up what the HEROES Act contains. Which really tells you all you need to know about the Democratic Party.
7 Likes
Even if it were a mirage, it wasn’t to Trump. He badly wanted that stimulus. If Nancy comes out and says she agree’s to the WH deal. She tells Trump she agrees. If the Senate then tries to fucking tank it Trump is going to shit all over them and rage.
They either pass it and take a hit in the senate from their supporters who don’t want them too, or they nuke it and take a hit from their supporters that want them too and for defying dear leader. Either way its incredibly good politics from the dems.
Only real risk here is it gives Trump the win, which honestly I highly doubt. Pretty sure the 80 million who voted against him still do it regardless, especially since the money wouldn’t come in until after the election.
1 Like
This is it right here. We discuss negotiating tactics as if eDems are operating in good faith on the behalf of the average American.
We might as well be discussing whether The Rock can crack Vince’s skull in Wrestlemania 2020: Meme Wars. He’s not actually hitting him with a steel chair so no, no he can’t.
3 Likes
This. I was listening to the majority report and they talked about how Nancy crafts these bills. She goes to caucus leaders and lets all of them write their own little piece of the bill so that they feel important, part of the process, and helps her maintain power.
Which is why the bill is just so convoluted with a bunch of shit instead of a clear concise bill easy to message on.
True, but still I don’t think forcing a vote on the Heros Act would have had the same effect as forcing a vote on a WH backed bill. Nobody fucking knew what the heros act was, it was passed like 6 months before and nobody ever talked about it. They needed to force a vote on something after it got a lot of media attention.
Forcing a vote on the Heros act would have been a non story like the healthcare bill was. They should have focred a vote immediately after saying they agree to the 1.8 trillion dollar deal.
But yeah we’re in fantasyland because the dems don’t give a shit. But if they did they should have accepted the 1.8 trillion and forced a vote to drive a wedge between Republican senators, Trump, and the base.
I mean we always talk about suppressing their vote, literally nothing would have done that more than this
I think it would have let Trump win (0.25% in GA, 0.31% in AZ, 0.63% in WI flips it). But even if not, we’re right about good strategy. If anything we were having the wrong discussion.
The discussion should have been: Dems are not going to campaign on stimulus because they don’t really want to give us much, so should we hope they take table scraps now because it’s all we can get?
I mean it turns out both sides do lie equally:
Mitch Lie: We don’t need stimulus til after the election, then we’ll probably do some.
Truth: He’s never for it
Nancy Lie: We need to give everyone strong stimulus and no liability shield, that’s why there’s no deal.
Truth: She didn’t really want to give us all stimulus, or she would have campaigned on it.
1 Like
I don’t think you are totally wrong but here are a couple things to think about.
-We only got the WH up to 1.6t or whatever after months of not caving. Saying those of us who didn’t want to cave in July when the nun meltdown happened and the WH was at 1t or whatever weren’t wrong. We were right. Not caving got a larger WH proposal.
-The real end boss here is Mitch, not Trump. Trump rages against something new every day or two and it isn’t at all clear that matters. Mitch probably wanted Trump to lose. Mitch had no interest in passing a comprehensive stimulus bill and he made that clear publicly.
-The Dems caving is exactly how we got into the situation we are in. And guess what the Dems are caving on everything again now. If you really think Nancy and the Dems wanted to do anything more than give the appearance of trying why are they now about to pass a Republican bill most likely? You are putting way to much faith in what Pelosi said publicly rather than looking at what happened. Trump may have badly wanted a bill passed but it’s obvious the Dem establishment didn’t. They could have passed bill after bill, they could have forced a Senate vote. Other than Nancy going on CNBC and pumping the stock market for months where is the proof she had any intention of a compromise bill pre-election?
3 Likes