Is there a good replacement? To me it sounds like there is a push for Biden to step down without a good alternative.
The more and more this continues the more I’m thinking that it is the rich owners of media companies trying to destroy Biden chances, because of his stance of taxing the rich. It feels like that whole noise is being done by media in bad faith, also they are very silent about trump in Epstein files.
I too am thinking this, Biden has picked an amazingly effective team that is making big changes for the positive for the average person, and has made some key strategic victories despite the courts and Congress being so against him.
He’s old, he needs his nap time more often than a spry 35 year old, his speech difficulties suck - but the actions his administration makes are not ignorable to the rich, and so I think the rich attempt to make them ignorable to the masses with their control of capital
You don’t have to convince me, you have to convince Joe voter in Penn’s woods who voted W then Obama and then Trump and then Biden. Joe from Pennsylvania measures his vote by his gut and not so much the issues. He picks a president, not a team.
And right now all Joe’s hearing is how Biden is more senile than anyone ever thought.
Someone on Imgur posted a slew of headlines from the Clinton candidacy in 2016. Many of them are eerily similar to the ones that have been dominating msm lately.
Newsom is not a good alternative. He is as corpo as it gets, refuses to take meaningful action against PG&E (the company is literally a convicted killer), and calls tax on the wealthy “bullshit”.
If Biden wanted to tax the rich why didn’t he try it when Dems controlled both chambers of Congress? I’m sure it’s more likely to happen under Biden than Trump but from where I sit it doesn’t seem likely to happen at all.
Because that Democratic “control” was razor thin and included people like Manchin/Sinema. We need an actual majority to pass anything without their cooperation. Even if Biden wanted 50s era tax levels on the top tax brackets (90%+), he simply doesn’t have the votes in Congress. Last time they had anything resembling a workable majority was during the Obama administration, when they passed the ACA over several months. Even then they had to water it down because of Joe Lieberman. One more vote would’ve resulted in a public option. Luckily tax policy can be done in reconciliation so a simple majority works in the Senate. Or we can elect a few more Senators willing to nuke the fillibuster, it’s pretty close now.
Point is, it’s not just on Biden (or any POTUS). Congress (and internal Democratic party politics) are fucked. Yeah he could be doing more to get party members in line with his agenda, but they’re pretty insulated at this point. We need to capture more seats in the general while ideally primarying every moderate member of the Democratic party we can. We have to be able to cancel our the 2-3 fuckers waiting to block shit, on top of the entire other party of y’all qaeda who blocks any attempt at progress.
Disclaimer: POTUS is now king supposedly so most of what I said could be accomplished with some strategic deportations of congressmembers and judges under official act by the border patrol or some shit.
Not having the votes isn’t a convenient excuse, it’s reality. I literally just gave you major legislation passed by the Democrats the last time they had control of Congress and POTUS. You’re not asking for effort, you’re asking for them to pass stuff and that requires more votes.
There are plenty of great progressive policy proposals that are supported by large swaths of the Democratic Party. Healthcare, ubi, abortion rights, immigration reform, etc. If they had to votes to pass shit and didn’t, you’d have a solid point. But they don’t, and there’s plenty of evidence that if they had the votes they would pass more legislation. Can you point to a time in the last 50 years when the Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority in congress w control of POTUS, and didn’t pass any major legislation?
I don’t take issue with your assertion that they don’t have the votes based on the way they play the game but I don’t agree that Manchin / Sinema / Lieberman are sufficient explanations for their lack of effort. There’s always a convenient scapegoat for failing to do what they promised but at some point they have to own that failure instead of blaming it on a couple people.
Also, the ACA is not a major piece of legislation to anyone outside of Congress. It’s a minor improvement over the completely unchecked shit show we had before but it is fundamentally no different than what we have always had. You’re framing it like they were so close to offering a public option but my recollection of those events is that they cut that from the proposal almost immediately and with little to no negotiation. That’s not fighting it’s letting your opponent dictate terms. Same goes with any number of other strategies and pieces of legislation from the same period or Bidens first 2 years. Dems could have gotten rid of the filibuster and actually fought for progress but they decided not to. That was party leadership’s decision, not Joe Manchin. People don’t give a shit what Dems say they support because they won’t even force a vote on most of it, much less actually implement it.
The two “Democrats” that were giving the control weren’t really Democrats. They even changed their party. Manchin at least was not hiding who he was (he was always known as a moderate Republican), but Sinema totally cheated her voters and sold herself as soon as it was possible.
The media misses the hourly ‘tRump opened his mouth, and here’s what came out’ coverage they were providing. It was the most return for the least effort. Find a few talking heads to argue what it means for [rolls dice] ‘seniors’ to fill a few hours of air.
Is there a good replacement? To me it sounds like there is a push for Biden to step down without a good alternative.
The more and more this continues the more I’m thinking that it is the rich owners of media companies trying to destroy Biden chances, because of his stance of taxing the rich. It feels like that whole noise is being done by media in bad faith, also they are very silent about trump in Epstein files.
Or just about everything Trump had to say in the debate in general. Absolutely the words of a madman with every answer.
I too am thinking this, Biden has picked an amazingly effective team that is making big changes for the positive for the average person, and has made some key strategic victories despite the courts and Congress being so against him.
He’s old, he needs his nap time more often than a spry 35 year old, his speech difficulties suck - but the actions his administration makes are not ignorable to the rich, and so I think the rich attempt to make them ignorable to the masses with their control of capital
You don’t have to convince me, you have to convince Joe voter in Penn’s woods who voted W then Obama and then Trump and then Biden. Joe from Pennsylvania measures his vote by his gut and not so much the issues. He picks a president, not a team.
And right now all Joe’s hearing is how Biden is more senile than anyone ever thought.
Do you think that’s an unfair assessment?
Do you think that Joe thinks this is an unfair assessment?
I don’t think he’s in any condition to make such an assessment.
And yet, he must. He is the one signing his vote.
Someone on Imgur posted a slew of headlines from the Clinton candidacy in 2016. Many of them are eerily similar to the ones that have been dominating msm lately.
Turns out they were right. Wish people would have listened back then.
Whitmer. Buttigieg. Newsom. Harris. Ignore this and repeat the question like no one has answered it.
Newsom is not a good alternative. He is as corpo as it gets, refuses to take meaningful action against PG&E (the company is literally a convicted killer), and calls tax on the wealthy “bullshit”.
He’s neither Trump nor Biden.
This is the Democratic Party we’re talking about. They’re going to give us a corpo stooge no matter what.
The question wasn’t about which candidate I like, just which ones could run instead of Biden and have a chance against Trump.
If Biden wanted to tax the rich why didn’t he try it when Dems controlled both chambers of Congress? I’m sure it’s more likely to happen under Biden than Trump but from where I sit it doesn’t seem likely to happen at all.
Because that Democratic “control” was razor thin and included people like Manchin/Sinema. We need an actual majority to pass anything without their cooperation. Even if Biden wanted 50s era tax levels on the top tax brackets (90%+), he simply doesn’t have the votes in Congress. Last time they had anything resembling a workable majority was during the Obama administration, when they passed the ACA over several months. Even then they had to water it down because of Joe Lieberman. One more vote would’ve resulted in a public option. Luckily tax policy can be done in reconciliation so a simple majority works in the Senate. Or we can elect a few more Senators willing to nuke the fillibuster, it’s pretty close now.
Point is, it’s not just on Biden (or any POTUS). Congress (and internal Democratic party politics) are fucked. Yeah he could be doing more to get party members in line with his agenda, but they’re pretty insulated at this point. We need to capture more seats in the general while ideally primarying every moderate member of the Democratic party we can. We have to be able to cancel our the 2-3 fuckers waiting to block shit, on top of the entire other party of y’all qaeda who blocks any attempt at progress.
Disclaimer: POTUS is now king supposedly so most of what I said could be accomplished with some strategic deportations of congressmembers and judges under official act by the border patrol or some shit.
Convenient excuses. This has been the reasoning used to justify Dems doing nothing for decades. Show me the effort or don’t talk about desire.
Not having the votes isn’t a convenient excuse, it’s reality. I literally just gave you major legislation passed by the Democrats the last time they had control of Congress and POTUS. You’re not asking for effort, you’re asking for them to pass stuff and that requires more votes.
There are plenty of great progressive policy proposals that are supported by large swaths of the Democratic Party. Healthcare, ubi, abortion rights, immigration reform, etc. If they had to votes to pass shit and didn’t, you’d have a solid point. But they don’t, and there’s plenty of evidence that if they had the votes they would pass more legislation. Can you point to a time in the last 50 years when the Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority in congress w control of POTUS, and didn’t pass any major legislation?
I don’t take issue with your assertion that they don’t have the votes based on the way they play the game but I don’t agree that Manchin / Sinema / Lieberman are sufficient explanations for their lack of effort. There’s always a convenient scapegoat for failing to do what they promised but at some point they have to own that failure instead of blaming it on a couple people.
Also, the ACA is not a major piece of legislation to anyone outside of Congress. It’s a minor improvement over the completely unchecked shit show we had before but it is fundamentally no different than what we have always had. You’re framing it like they were so close to offering a public option but my recollection of those events is that they cut that from the proposal almost immediately and with little to no negotiation. That’s not fighting it’s letting your opponent dictate terms. Same goes with any number of other strategies and pieces of legislation from the same period or Bidens first 2 years. Dems could have gotten rid of the filibuster and actually fought for progress but they decided not to. That was party leadership’s decision, not Joe Manchin. People don’t give a shit what Dems say they support because they won’t even force a vote on most of it, much less actually implement it.
Manchin and Sinema
The two “Democrats” that were giving the control weren’t really Democrats. They even changed their party. Manchin at least was not hiding who he was (he was always known as a moderate Republican), but Sinema totally cheated her voters and sold herself as soon as it was possible.
I’ve noticed that greater loyalty to the party is expected from the voters than from those they elect.
What’s wrong with Kamala? Seems like Progressives have largely gotten over her record as AG. That’s why they hid her in the first place.
Have they gotten over it? I didn’t know anyone had. Nor have I heard of any initiative she successfully handled
The media misses the hourly ‘tRump opened his mouth, and here’s what came out’ coverage they were providing. It was the most return for the least effort. Find a few talking heads to argue what it means for [rolls dice] ‘seniors’ to fill a few hours of air.
It’s like they had that meeting in The Boys and the argument was successful