The Presidency of the Joes: more like INFRASTRUCTURE WEAK

You forgot no dead babies.

It’s kind of sad people even itt, as highly knowledgeable of politics we all are, still can’t differentiate what Biden is responsible for from what he has little control over.

Biden is responsible for bombing Syria.

Biden is not responsible for the failure of the minimum wage to be part of the relief bill.

American culture indoctrinated people to think the President is a God King that personally directs the affairs of the US. Its part of the mythology.

At first I was going to post this agreeing with Riverman, but after thinking about it, it’s very likely Biden could easily convince Manchin/Cinema to agree to it, and if not he could pressure them. LBJ would have gotten it done.

So him just sitting around not fighting for shit puts a lot of blame on him. I blame him for than say Schumer. Biden has a way better shot and way more pull to convince the semi Republicans than Schumer does. Hell Manchin has said a few times " I’m going to wait to talk to Biden " Biden obv has a ton of shitlib semi republican cred with Manchin.

This isn’t like Obama when Republicans controlled a house and he couldn’t do a damn thing.

It’s party Joe’s fault, partly us not having more people in the senate, partly Schumers fault, partly lol democrats.

7 Likes

Is there evidence he isn’t fighting or could convince mansheen and chimera?

There were no in person talks, and the dems gave their decision almost immediately to not over rule or fire the parliamentarian.

And like I said, Manchin has said a couple times " I’ll talk to the president " a few times in regards to stuff he publicly opposed at first. It’s obvious Biden has a lot of cred with him.

Look at LBJ, the president can accomplish a TON in congress if he’s willing to throw his weight around. This bill has a 70% approval with the American people, that plus Joe throwing his weight around no fucking way this doesn’t get done.

I honestly don’t know how I feel about firing the parliamentarian but is seems a bit odd to argue on one hand the voting rights bill is critical to reestablish norms while at the same time they should just fire the “non-partisan” senate gatekeeper for ruling against them.

Who is arguing we need the voting rights bill to establish " norms " We need it so we have a democracy. lol norms, norms are destroyed and gone forever and if dems abide by them and Republicans blow them up dems are going to get steamrolled like they always fucking do.

The Parliamentarian is dumb. The CBO gave a report saying it directly influences the budget, Reps already blew up this norm in 2001 and will again first chance, they also ruled Republicans could do shit like drill oil where ever they wanted etc.

Non partisan doesn’t mean unbiased.

6 Likes

Democracy is impossible without norms. If the Dems somehow push enough stuff through to hold power, democracy is also gone. If you assume the GOP taking control means they will succesfully rig the game, it’s gone.

1 Like

It’s hard not to see this interpretation as liking laws and norms that help us and simply ignoring those that don’t. A little too familiar.

Again, I am playing devils advocate here a bit but couldn’t the dems position on the parliamentarian simply be trying to put back in place a belief in the process, without which no voting rights bill will help to protect democracy.

lol no. Dems pushing through legislation to make voting easy and accessible then the party that appeals to the most people wins. That doesn’t mean democracy is done, it means the Republican party needs to widen it’s appeal.

Gerrymandering, voter suppression, rigging the judiciary = democracy is done. Easy to vote and most wins = democracy is fair.

I’m not sure about democracy without norms, if that’s true maybe we can try to add them back in at a later date once the modern day GOP is destroyed, but until then we literally have no choice. Do you think we should just start trying norms again and the GOP will abide? You can’t be that dumb.

2 Likes

Why are republicans going to follow a voting rights act?

It’s a law not a norm? Ignoring a federal law would basically be seccedding and the federal government has a TON of ways it can punish a state or many states for that.

Again, Republicans blew up this exact norm 20 years ago. Why have the dems done anything Republicans asked since? Because firing the parliamentarian or over ruling them doesn’t equate to freaking ignoring federal laws lmao.

I’m done on this convo because I don’t want people to wake up to us going around in circles for 100 posts.

2 Likes

I agree with you. I just don’t think we should use what the republicans have done or will do as a yard stick. We don’t want to base our society on the most insane 20% of its members.

Biden isn’t fighting in the slightest for the minimum wage increase, thus he is partially responsible.

sounds good when do we start

3 Likes

Either we play GTO or poor people, the planet, everything decent in this whole fucking world is completely and totally fucked. We have no choice Clovis, they have forced our hand.

Republicans are ALWAYS going to blow up norms, until they’re punished for it. Dems sitting around following norms not getting popular legislation passed is the exact fucking opposite of that. It’s rewarding them for it.

15 Likes

Ya I intellectually know you are right. I just keep whipsawing back and fourth between the emotional belief that if we just do what republicans have done we just make it all worse to simple game theory that our only solution is tit for tat.

I just hope you are right that once this GTO death match is over there is something still standing to rebuild. It’s a pretty gross place to be in.

1 Like

How much worse is it supposed to get for people making 7 an hour as frontline workers, without a vaccine against the deadly pandemic, who are seeing their life money get spent on a forever war

2 Likes

When Obama attempted to withdraw from Iraq, terrorists filled that power vacuum and he had to go back to bombing them.

Dubya’s decision to get involved militarily in Iraq has forced America into having a permanent military presence in the Middle East. No future president will ever withdraw troops from the ME successfully.