https://www.axios.com/2022/08/01/corporate-america-strikes-back
Itās a sealed bid process. Only all the bids are to vote ānoā and all envelopes contain untraceable cash.
Do we know when the vote is scheduled?
The last I read, the schedule was still a bit unclear. The parliamentarian still gets to take a crack at it to make sure all of the provisions are things that can be done through the reconciliation process, and thereās some other procedural stuff, AND a few members have been out with Covid. Theyāre supposed to go on recess on the 8th, so theyāll probably try to get it done by then, but it may come down to the wire (assuming it gets done).
1 Like
Lol at Dems giving any fucks at all what the parliamentarian says. Total. Fucking. Losers.
Iām pretty sure Dems donāt have enough votes to override the parliamentarian.
1 Like
https://twitter.com/SebastianAFP/status/1554261149054652416?t=QFn255BJFbziO_v6W6NpMQ&s=19
Lil too much time on the balcony.
My entire political life has been a total fraud.
2 Likes
Huh? The VP can simply say LOL OVERRULED.
Thatās not how the nuclear option works. You still need a floor vote to affirm the new precedent. I doubt you get Manchin or Sinema to agree with overriding the parliamentarian.
1 Like
China is completely wrong here, right? Like obviously US foreign policy is terrible but they have no legitimate claim to Taiwan? I guess they got away with it in Hong Kong so why not try again?
I think this depends on what you mean by āChinaā. The Peopleās Republic is one thing, the vaguer historical idea of what is āreallyā China is less clear. Thereās probably legitimate arguments for and against unification of Taiwan and China into a single country, but the PRC policy is basically the policy of a bully so thereās some understandable objection to their desired end goals.
Both Beijing and Taiwan adhere to the idea that there is one China and disagree on who is the legitimate government. US foreign policy recognizes that the PRC is effectively China but maintains unofficial ties with the ROC. The US abandoning the āone Chinaā policy would probably lead to the Communist government eventually deciding to unify China by force. Whether that is terrible depends on if you think maintaining the status quo is worth avoiding war. Taiwan seems to think so.
The UK leased the New Territories, so they had to give Hong Kong back when the lease expired. Iām not sure what you think China got away with there.
As I understand it they said āwe will leave Hong Kong aloneā then immediately did a butnahhhhh when the UK turned it over to them.
I donāt think they were under any obligation to make promises and youāre a fool if you believed any promises they did make.
2 Likes
Iām not talking about the nuclear option. The parliamentarianās recommendations are exactly thatārecommendationsāand (s)he works at the pleasure of the president. The VP can simply say ālol noā to any of these Byrd rule calls. The parliamentarian can also be replaced with a yes man. The fact that Mansion and Cinema are going to kill any bill of consequence doesnāt change this.
1 Like
well thatās what theyāre signalling, the trillion dollar question is whether theyād actually pull the trigger or not
It still has to be sustained on an appeal to the Senate body. I donāt think there are enough votes to set the precedent that the Senate plays Calvinball.
If you believe that Chinese policy is dictated by a desire to āsave faceā, then pulling the trigger on war if the āone Chinaā policy is violated seems likely. If Taiwan unnecessarily provoked China into war then, unlike Ukraine, Iād say they brought it on themselves and wouldnāt feel like the US is obligated to intervene.
this seems like a bait and switch since the post I was responding to specified the US no longer participating in the one china charade