Do you think a progressive Democrat would have won in Sinema or Manchin’s states?
The Biden Presidency
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Definitely not in Arizona. If the Dems didn't run centrists, both AZ seats would be R right now, as would the US Senate.
The rest of party can vote on major policies for good press because they know it will never pass. If there was a chance of policy going through, imo you would see a lot of democrats drop their support.
Also considering what’s at stakes, if it really was two shit head senators stopping policy then there are clearly many ways to get their support.
Personally no but let’s say a miracle happened and one did, then I would be pretty sure we would just get another couple conservatives democrats somewhere else popping up saying well now I can’t support the Biden agenda, etc. Sienna and Manchin just play role of the obstructing and are used a an example of we need to vote harder, when the reality is the party have no intention of change anything(There’s plenty of executive orders Biden could have done but hasn’t been arsed on any basic level)
Alright, well, I don’t believe in the conspiracy that you’re saying is at play here. The fact is, as you personally believe, a progressive wouldn’t have won in those states, so we are left with Sinema and Manchin or 2 even further right wing Republicans.
Exactly.
The party members are obviously going to vote on the agenda they were elected on by the public. It would seem that your beef is therefore with Americans, and less so with the politicians they chose to represent them.
It’s not really a conspiracy as it happens all the time in politics, politicians will be happy to be sen to support policy when they it’s impossible to pass.
Also again it’s really just two senators standing in the way of stopping the democrats from making reforms and fighting off a far right republican, then why aren’t the dems and actually the average American(Including posters on here) outside the houses of Sinema and Manchin everyday and making their life incredibly difficult ?
Both are very annoying.
You literally posed a miracle and then said that Democrats would conspire to get 2 door stops in office anyway. I don’t know what else to call that.
To your 2nd point… Sinema and Manchin were elected by the voters of their respective states. I’d imagine they’re not picketing their houses because they think they’re doing what they elected them to do. America isn’t a monolith, and voters in individual states have very different priorities to others.
I’m going to assume you’re not serious about wondering why American posters on here aren’t in Arizona and West Virginia every day.
You post on here about how fascism is here in America and the dangers of Republican Party , right ? But then at the same time you think the only thing stopping the democrats from putting into action policy that would help slow down the fascist Republican Party is two senators.
If you and other Americans really believe this, then why aren’t you protesting nigh and day outside Manchin house ? It seems like a small price to pay for potentially saving American democracy ?
I just don’t really get it tbh. If people really think the issue is 2 conservative democrats senators then they really shouldn’t wasting their time posting on football forums.
Have you ever looked at a map?
I know you lot tend to be larger than the rest of us but travelling can’t be that difficult, right ?
Why would anyone bother protesting outside Manchin's house when he is doing what most of his WV constituents want. He is literally a manifestation of their political preferences, otherwise they wouldn't have supported him in sufficient numbers to win, in what is otherwise a fairly Republican state. Same scenario applies to Arizona as well.
You’re so right. Let’s all just quit our jobs and stay hundreds to thousands of miles from our homes each day to protest outside the houses of senators that we can’t even vote for… who were elected by people who can vote for them. Nailed it!
I mean if you think the alternative of the Democratic Party falling is fascism(Which you seem think so)then yeah I’m sorry you might have to skip work.
Actually, as America is a global power, everyone should protest outside Sinema and Manchin’s houses. You included. I look forward to seeing all of you folks flying in to help out.
I mean if you think the alternative of the Democratic Party falling is fascism(Which you seem think so)then yeah I’m sorry you might have to skip work.
Is this Manchin's last term do you think? No way any D will win WV after him. Is there no way to make him a tempting offer to give up his conservative principles (or at least some of them) for the remainder of his term?
A tempting offer like what? Especially if he’s on his way out. Why would he change?
Thankfully the rest of world doesn’t seem to hold your very unique take on politics(Although a world wide invasion of the USA would both improve your awful healthcare and bad food)
Which tbh thinking the badly dress senator is enabling fascism but you can’t do anything about it because of next week busy staff meeting is very on brand democrat.
No, no. You literally have as much a say in Sinema or Manchin getting elected as I do, so if I should be making a 4000 mile round trip to their houses each day, so should you.
No idea, I am the one asking from a position of ignorance!
Do you think it has been tried? Putting him on some boards, or running some organisation, offering some prestigious post somewhere? LBJ probably would have bribed him heavily by this point in time!
The reality is, when he retires, being a former US Senator will open up pretty much any door he wants.
Besides that, he’s announced that he’s running again in 2024.
I know this is pointless but I actually don’t think it matter if Sinema or Manchin are replace by a progressive. Like I said in my other posts, they are easy excuses for he dems to not do anything.
But anyway we’ve agree on a worldwide invasion of the United States, which is some progress.
That's probably what will happen. WV has already been drifting R in recent years and will more than likely elect an R Senator next. The only value Manchin serves the Dems is that he caucuses with them, which allows them to keep control of the Senate, which although pointless in many ways given Manchin and Sinema's obstruction to the Dem agenda, does help in terms of SCOTUS nominations, investigations, and bringing certain bills up for a full floor vote (which McConnell routinely obstructed when Rs were in charge of the Senate).
Ah well, that's that then.
Pretty much. And in all honesty, I don’t know what they could really offer him right now that’s better than what he is. He’s essentially the most powerful man in America because he controls the legislative agenda from his seat in the Senate.
The dynamic that we're seeing is that, with one or two possible exceptions, states with large population centers are generally drifting Dem, while those without one are drifting R. This means Manchin's chances of reelection will be increasingly fleeting in 24, while Dems will have a decent chance of retaining their two seats in AZ (which is largely driven by turnout in Phoenix suburbs). It will also favor Dems in places like CO, VA, GA etc. The only notable outlier is FL, due to the unique dynamics of Cubans in South Florida, the fact much of the rest of the state is R leaning, and a large amount of military bases and elderly retirees - all of which suggest FL will be a tall order for Dems in the near term. Collectively however, they should do well in the Senate given that GA, AZ, CO, and VA are all favorable for them.
I would also add NC to the list of states that might do a GA. The Senate seat this year has no incumbent (Burr is retiring) and Tillis only won by 1.8% in 20 and would have lost if Cunningham hadn’t been sending dick pics or whatever he did.
Fetterman should flip PA and hopefully Ryan and Barnes can flip OH and WI.
Just looking at hos poll figures on different issues. He's finished.
people are suffering from ideological delusions if they think biden is in anyway good or has been so since becoming president. he's done nothing except those things which have all been bad and we're back to rotating villain territory with 2 all powerful senators blocking trillion dollar legislation.
1. back conservative senators.
2. they're better than other more conservative senators.
3. they'll back our policies. if they didn't what would be the point?
4. they don't back our policies.
5. it's all their fault.
6. we need to back more of these people in the future.
anyone falling for that is surely stupid
1. back conservative senators.
2. they're better than other more conservative senators.
3. they'll back our policies. if they didn't what would be the point?
4. they don't back our policies.
5. it's all their fault.
6. we need to back more of these people in the future.
anyone falling for that is surely stupid
going by the historical record, i'd say this is true with about 99.9% certainty.
This is who Manchin really cares about
Who cut checks to Manchin last quarter
https://www.politico.com/newsletter...o-cut-checks-to-manchin-last-quarter-00046169
Who cut checks to Manchin last quarter
https://www.politico.com/newsletter...o-cut-checks-to-manchin-last-quarter-00046169
That really isn't that much money. Makes you wonder how much hidden money he is getting from these energy companies. I wish the Dems would strip him of his Chair of the Energy Committee so he would not have as much influence.
it really isn't much money at all. it's a few grand. he's backed by much more than that beyond surface campaign donations but as someone else said lbj would have strong-armed or bribed his way around this by now. it's trillion dollar legislative agenda material. if you can't find a way to trade horses, which is what politics is about, to get the larger deal passed then the blame is on you. so many things you could do. could exempt virginia from reforms for extended period and find a murky way to route some of that thousand billion dollars into the same hands that would otherwise hold manchin's hand back from signing his name. it's washington 101.
Indeed, this is what is currently missing in the picture: a POTUS willing to twist a rogue Senator's arm or doing whatever necessary to get that sumabitch on board with the agenda. I find it partiularly bizarre that Joe, for all the years he spent in the Senate, doesn't know (or at least makes it look that way) that it is a regular occurrence. I know that people in 2022 have that image of Frank Underwood when they look for a visual description of playing dirty in order to pass an agenda, but that has been the name of the game of politics for a very long time.
Errrr......probably best to not mention him, seeing as the actor who plays him has lets say a bit of a dodgy past...
October 4, 2009:
April 10 2010:
As you know, the ACA passed through reconciliation, which Rockefeller somehow found himself supporting despite its partisan nature, and despite the bill missing his safe harbor. Such are the mysteries of life and the democratic party.
Here's Ezra Klein, the man who once described Obama's speeches with these words: "He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh", talking about the same thing:
On the surface, then, you have almost 20 senators supporting the idea, the Senate majority leader giving it his backing and the White House saying they'll follow the Senate's lead. Green pastures ahead, right?
Well, not as far as I can tell. I've spoken to a lot of offices about this now, and all of them are ambivalent privately, even if they're supportive publicly. No one feels able to say no to this letter, but none of them seem interested in reopening the wars over the public option.
What you're seeing here are the weird politics of the public option at play. It's popular in the country. It's wildly popular among the base. It's the subject of obsessive interest in the media. There is little downside to supporting it publicly, huge downside to opposing it, and no one is allowed to ignore the issue, or even take a few days to see where the votes are.
But it's divisive on the Hill. Bringing it back energizes all the narratives that Democrats fear most: That they're cutting secret deals without Republicans in the room, that they're building an extremist bill, that health-care reform is a government takeover.
Well, not as far as I can tell. I've spoken to a lot of offices about this now, and all of them are ambivalent privately, even if they're supportive publicly. No one feels able to say no to this letter, but none of them seem interested in reopening the wars over the public option.
What you're seeing here are the weird politics of the public option at play. It's popular in the country. It's wildly popular among the base. It's the subject of obsessive interest in the media. There is little downside to supporting it publicly, huge downside to opposing it, and no one is allowed to ignore the issue, or even take a few days to see where the votes are.
But it's divisive on the Hill. Bringing it back energizes all the narratives that Democrats fear most: That they're cutting secret deals without Republicans in the room, that they're building an extremist bill, that health-care reform is a government takeover.
More recently, you have the war in Yemen. Bernie and Rand Paul had a bill ending US support for the Saudi war effort. Vote totals here showing that cowardly statement votes and flipping are bipartisan endeavors!
In 2018, safe in the knowledge that Speaker Paul Ryan wouldn't allow it to be voted on in the House, and Trump would veto it if it passed anyway, the senate voted for this bill 56-41, with no Democrats opposed. Ryan duly didn't allow a vote.
In 2019, safe under the knowledge of Trump's upcoming veto, the Senate voted for it 54-46, again with no Dems opposed. Trump duly vetoed after the House passed the bill.
Now we are in 2020. Biden is president, coming into office vowing to punish Saudi Arabia, the good party have both parts of Congress, and Sanders and Paul are both still senators!
In 2021 the bill is never introduced in the House or Senate. Huh.
A new bill by Paul, to block some weapon sales, is voted down 67-30. 21 Democrats, 20 of whom voted for the bill in 2019, opposed this one. Of course you had you Manchin and Sinema, but you also had Biden's closest ally Chris Coons, the technocratic favourite Bennet, and multiple senators from deep blue north-eastern states, Huh.
In 2022 the bill is introduced in May in the house and more recently in the senate. It has not got a hearing, let alone a vote in committee, let alone a full vote. It has already lost multiple Dem co-sponsors compared to 2019, lest you thought there was any chance the party would make the president have to issue an extra-embarrassing veto.
Oh well. Damn those blasted Manchins! Please ignore that 6 Democrats other than the 2 designated villains voted against a $15 min wage!!
I’m on vacation on Cape Cod, so respectfully, is there a TL/DR version?
his point i think is that rotating villain theory isn't really a conspiracy theory but a feature of washington politics under the duopoly. hard to deny the facts.