spacemang_spliff posted:

It's still shut down

The only place Reade can talk about it is RT.com and then it's "Russian propaganda".

Bootleg Trunks posted:

Neera sure is concerned about Republicans feelings

The Oldest Man posted:

She is the left

Tom Guycot posted:

McConnell posted:

Eggplant Squire posted:

Aren't the cable news headlines saying the pandemic is on the wain now anyway who even cares about vaccines anymore

Zhulik posted:

i thought they didnt manage to impeach him a second time

Thoguh posted:

Yeah but this is just step one on the Chelsea Clinton/Meghan McCain/General Failchild of the Aristocracy evolution. This gig gives them the "experience" for the next one and that gives them the one after and by the time they're 30 they're on the boards of a bunch of non profis and then its self sustaining because look at how accomplished and philanthropic they are! Probably have a couple best selling ghost written books that were bought in bulk by their foundation too!

lmao posted:

If $15/hr won't work in this COVID emergency legislation then so be it. The fight for 15 is alive and stronger than it ever has been both in the nation as a whole and within the halls of the Capitol. I think it will be possible to achieve with some luck.

mastershakeman posted:

i've seen people who are pretty savvy about the politics guessing game point out how easy it is to do dc/pr statehood, how it solves a lot of things long term, etc etc and that's why it + salt cap will be the only thing to get done

we just gotta wait and see because at this point it seems like there's literally no reason for congress to even exist

smellsownfarts posted:

One thing that constantly gets forgotten is that Bush II tried in some respects to shift the republican party away from the open embrace of racism that typifies the current republican party and drove the realignment. Bush II tried to tamp down (to a limited degree) open embrace of anti-muslim bias as a republican party plank This was not a policy thing - it had no impact on the war on terror - it was part of the "compassionate conservatism" rebranding. On a more policy level, the Bush II admin was in favor of immigration reform, as was (at the time) a reasonably sized bloc of elected republicans. Both things made it so that if you were a racist old white voter, the republican party was not advertising itself to you as The Party Of Racism. McCain's campaign continued that.

Now, this was always a polite veneer over the reality - the Republican Party was the party of racism, in reality and in policy - but it was trying to brand itself differently. And that gave an opening to keep certain people in the democratic tent because while they didn't like the Democratic Party's increasing acceptance of civil rights and immigration, the republican party wasn't making a concerted campaign to recruit them based on their dislike of those issues.

Hence, the ability of Obama to appeal to people who ultimately flipped to the Republican Party based on racism: the Republican Party wasn't advertising itself to them. So between two parties that weren't really appealing to their core desires, they went with Obama and the Democrats because if you're picking on economic policy, even Republican base voters don't like Republican economic policy, and Bush had just stupendously wrecked the economy.

But people harping on the "just run on unapologetic leftism!!!!" continually ignore that: racism is a stronger vote motivator. Trump flipped people by going "gently caress it, we're going to be open about this, immigrants aren't people, etc etc" and so because certaon blocs of voters like the racism more than they like the economic policy, people flipped.* Now, had Democrats done a better job in the 90s, perhaps these people would not have become as embittered as they are and not been vulnerable to that appeal. But that's not the same as that if you change those policies, those people will come back.

* the converse also happened after 2016: when the suburbs realized that no, trump was quite serious about being unapologetically pro-racism, they flipped to democrats even though they are much more of a natural fit for republican economic policies than blue-collar racist old white guys.

spacemang_spliff posted:

if D&D doesn't like their dogshit posts getting mocked they're more than welcome to come defend "it's not a concentration camp because Webster's dictionary defines concentration camp as...."

Raccooon posted:

You know one easy step would be to give free access to these facilities to third party civil rights groups/the UN to monitor and document everything that happens at them.

If they are so great now then it shouldn't be a problem.

Fleetwood posted:

the new modular home initiative for migrant children is a solid testbed for a wider housing campaign imo

zegermans posted:

have they deployed ducklo yet

mcmagic posted:

It's insane that there are people who are such Neera Tanden stans that they would bother to go on twitter and mean tweet in defense of her lol. Why!? Cause they saw her on MSNBC a few times?

Eifert Posting posted:

Ok, it seems like he has ethical concerns re the Morales govt? There have been, apparently, a lot of police actions during the Morales govt. That doesn't mean a popular govt didn't get coup'd though? The fact Morales' govt was able to win an election despite not being in power is clearly a sign his support isn't coerced. Yeah it's super suspect, y'all are right. The fact that all this poo poo went down after Morales pushed back on exporting lithium reads like a stereotype.


Makes me want to read more about the Morales govt prior to the political disturbances.

Asema posted:

lmao are they seriously not voting on the day one 2000 relief until march loving 14th

bedpan posted:

ok, finish the thought. you have a 50-50 senate, and need to deliver real, actionable things to voters before your next election. you either:

1) pass the stuff you can pass with 50 votes
2) you don't

which choice does your logic suggest you take

people aren't suggesting that democrats shape their policy around what is good for joe manchin keeping his political career. people are saying that democrats need to shape their policy around what joe manchin will vote for. and one of the things that joe manchin is going to consider is what is good for joe manchin.

that it would be advantageous for democrats to leave manchin for dead by having him vote for all sorts of stuff that means he'll lose in 2024 is an irrelevancy because democrats don't get to decide how manchin votes; he does.

bedpan posted:

ok, you think passing a "watered down" bill will lead to republicans taking control. what do you believe passing no bill will do.

we'll ignore your religious belief that there's a magic "make manchin do what we want" button, because that's obviously just magical thinking trying to paper over the obvious hole in your logic

How in the world is $600 less in stimulus and a $15 minimum wage hike axed by the parliamentarian (not by compromise) "watered down into oblivion"? Is it just because you don't need all the rest of the stuff in the bill?

bedpan posted:

This really isn't true and the COVID bill should prove that. There have been numerous takes from journalists saying how much the makeup of the Dem's and their thinking has evolved in the past 10 years. The bill that's about to go through reconciliation would have been impossible with the Dems in leadership a decade ago. Change is happening - Bernie Sanders is about to get a $15 minimum wage passed and is accepted as a fundamental part of Dem leadership now, that was unthinkable 5 years ago.

bedpan posted:

Yes the Senate as an institution loving sucks and almost everyone hates it. I'd say the majority of Democrats holding office right now are very interested in changing it but you have 0% power over the ones who don't, you can't pretend that you do.

This would not matter if the GOP wasn't such a terrible party that you can't even find 10 votes to pass basic aid to people in an emergency.

Stop excusing the fact that our system is entirely broken due to the GOP not because of a few dumb Dem Senators.


Is this a joke? You are going to blame the Democrats for not more aid going out when the GOP is the reason they can't do anything but a reconciliation bill that they can't use again for almost a year?

The stimulus that did go out last year was due to GOP terror and even then it didn't come close to what the Democrats were asking for. The Democrats still voted for it because they knew people needed it. Then there was 8 months of nothing because the GOP ideologically hates the very idea of giving people money and they never had enough votes to do it until they were so desperate to not lose GA they put a tiny sum on the table (which Trump then backstabbed them over).

Dolphin posted:

I don't give a poo poo about any of that. Manchin is what he is and it's not going to change. Using political power to persecute one's perceived enemies is Trumpism writ large.

I care about helping people in need. I'm sad we can't do as much as I'd like, but I'll take what I can get.