The Presidency of the Joes, part II: lol documents

https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell/status/1519361997917372417

2 Likes

https://twitter.com/VoxAbsurdum/status/1519441629907726336

If they do end up canceling a substantial amount of student debt I wonder how long the angry MAGA chuds can sustain their bellyaching with “I worked a job to pay for school (1980)” and “When is the govt paying off my truck?” It hits them right in that perfect grievance spot.

3 Likes

Maybe Dems should pursue policies based on maximum trolling of MAGA dudes.

1 Like

a week or two. that’s why its a no brainer win politics wise… the outrage cycle will churn on, but the people it helped will remember. (at least until the next immediate election cycle)

I wish I was as sure about that as you are.

When all is said and done, people are going to get like $500 student debt reduction, as long as they properly fill out forms A, B, C, and D proving that they don’t make over $35k/year.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1519702269842890755

4 Likes

Sounds more like a class action lawsuit where everyone ends up getting like $96 at the end.

2 Likes

Bah.

Last time I fucking sweet summer child this shit.

Its just hard, when, ya know…

1 Like

Biden wants to lose in 2024.

God forbid

That’s why when someone shows serious party disloyalty and also literal lies like he does you just nuke him from orbit, remove from all committees, etc. It’s not about Manchin, its about the next ten wannabe Manchins.

You’ll notice this kind of duplicity doesn’t exist with the other party. There’s a reason for this. They also get what they want, always. There’s also a reason for this.

2 Likes

Lol means testing, of course

We means testing depreciation next, Joe? How about carried interest? You fucking imbecile

1 Like

Surely this is bad for Dems

The problem is, Manchin can easily say fuck off and run as an Independent and probably win in WV. Maybe even as a Republican, given his current numbers.

I mean at the end of the day the Dems aren’t trying to implement structural change and absent that, they need 50+1/51 senators to do anything and 60+ to do the stuff we want them to do. Even with structural change they need 50+1. To get structural change they probably need 55-58.

There are 18 states and thus 36 seats with a Cook PVI of Dem +1 or better. Dems have 35 of those 36 seats (Collins in Maine is the one).

There are two states that are Even, Dems have those four.

So even in a landscape where Dems win every seat that favors them and every even seat, the GOP has a filibuster proof majority.

Seven states are R+3 or less, of those 14 seats Dems control eight.

They also have Brown in Ohio at R+6.

The other two are Manchin in WV R+23 and Tester in Montana R+11. We need more Testers, as he very rarely fucks the party.

The R+4 to R+6 states we are getting swept in are Texas R+5 and Iowa R+6.

From a game theory perspective the party needs to triangulate to be able to reach 60 seats, assuming the Machins/Testers and Collins/Murkowskis even out.

The 30 bluest states include everything up to R+6.

So Dems need to be able to sweep Iowa, Texas, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, and all of the traditional swing states.

Fuck Manchin, but his vote for Senate Majority Leader remains crucial. Thing is, I don’t see how we can win West Virginia with anyone else. The problem isn’t Joe Manchin, it’s that Joe Manchin is Dem senator #50 and not #52 or #55.

Putting aside their massive strategic failures in terms of recognizing and countering the GOP’s fascist leanings, the party needs a massive overhaul in terms of tolerable platform unless/until they nuke the filibuster.

We should be running pro-gun, pro-life Dems in southern states who are also for single payer and nuking the filibuster, who understand but don’t care what that means for guns and abortion. Either because they’re lying about guns and abortion or because it’s not their main issue.

Essentially they need 51 votes to nuke the filibuster, 51 votes to codify Roe, 51 votes for gun control, 51 votes for single payer, etc. They don’t need to be the same 51 votes nor do they need to be in the same Congress, though.

Essentially to crib a scene from West Wing, they need to have enough votes to be able to get two senators in a room and say, “You’re a gun loving woman hating son of a bitch, and I’m a freedom hating gun grabbing baby killer. But we agree about the filibuster and healthcare, so let’s do something about that!”

The problem is the party leadership is unwilling to fund candidates too far left on economic issues, so when they accept moderates they’re accepting economic moderates.

Meanwhile the base won’t accept social moderates or pro-gun or pro-choice moderates.

All of that needs to but almost certainly won’t change. At this point I literally don’t care if a candidate in a red state like Texas fails every single purity test we could throw at them, as long as they answer yes to:

Will you vote for the Dem majority leader?

Will you vote to nuke the filibuster?

Cause every purity test they fail, the Republican will fail harder but answer no to those.

1 Like

Dems will wafflecrush every election if they just “purity test” based on what will get the most people out of poverty, debt, and the hospital.

Yep: single payer, minimum wage, monthly childcare tax credits, and nuking the filibuster since it’s required for all that. Federal jobs programs for climate, too.

But the real purity test needs to be the filibuster as it’s basically the pre-req for everything. Nuke it, pass whatever good stuff you have the votes for, and battle issue by issue and seat by seat for the rest, taking every marginal gain along the way.

They won’t pass the good stuff I’m talking about even when they have the votes, see Obama supermajority. The way to avoid this is by “purity testing” people at the beginning to make sure they don’t shank backs when it comes time to vote. Electing a bunch of bullshitter moderates just because they support the filibuster aint gonna do it

Feels like Biden is speedrunning the Bill Clinton presidency, just sub in hair sniffing for cigar antics

Yes we obviously need to elect actually good candidates in the primaries. Generally speaking shitty moderates don’t support nuking the filibuster anyway, though they hide it or lie about it.

But yeah the establishment is a corrupt joke and the reason they aren’t doing any of this is that they don’t actually want to win on the economic issues that matter to people.

4 of 5 most popular governors are “moderate” republicans in blue states. Bottom 5 are Dems in blue states. You’d think the GOP would want to run a moderate, who would crush in the general. Something like a less Romney version of Romney who isn’t up against incumbent Obama.

Funny thing is, this suggests that the GOP Trumpist strategy is likely keeping the base happy at the expense of winning a lot more stuff. It’s like they are more concerned with being flashy than actually winning the game,

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1519705738234503171?s=20&t=utsrNK2TOjEa0QL8JmWUiQ