Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 320: Comin' Out of the Woodward

(+) Yeah! (+)

Inviso posted...

Yeah. This is the reason we're in this mess, Corrik. Dems, ever caring about the population, rushed to get any sort of stimulus way back in the first half of the year. And they got the bare minimum of basic human decency, while Republicans got a bunch of unnecessary shit towards their party's platform. And now, when the people need help again, Republicans are pulling the same shit and expecting the Democrats to bow down.

The Heroes Act was never formed with the intention of it being passable. Dems knew that. I agree they should have negotiated earlier and had something ready to go, but if the Dems stance is we get our partisan fluff or no deal, a deal was never gonna be made then regardless of when they started.

---

Corrik7 posted...

The White House offer is hardly a bandaid.

The White House offer that Republicans are rejecting for being too much, you mean?

---

StealThisSheen posted...

The White House offer that Republicans are rejecting for being too much, you mean?

Republicans have never rejected it. McConnell has basically assured he can get the votes to pass it if a compromise is ever made with the Dems. The problem is he can't pass it without the Dems also because he can't get his entire caucus to support it in whole. If the Dems agreed to 1.5 trillion tomorrow with the WH, it would pass the Senate easily.

You would have to not be following things at all to think otherwise.

---

There's a reason McConnell only put forth the shitty $500 billion bill, because he's still bowing down to the people on his side that don't actually want to give anything.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

There's a reason McConnell only put forth the shitty $500 billion bill, because he's still bowing down to the people on his side that don't actually want to give anything.

He put out a $300 billion bill. Not $500 billion. And, he put it out because he knew it wouldn't be passed regardless and wanted something that if Dems did let them vote on that all Republicans could say they voted yes on while Dems filibustered it anyways.

Republicans in the Senate are NOT unified. However, he can easily get 30+ republican votes on any compromise made with the WH tomorrow. Hence, he needs a Dem compromise.

---

Corrik7 posted...

He put out a $300 billion bill. Not $500 billion. And, he put it out because he knew it wouldn't be passed regardless and wanted something that if Dems did let them vote on that all Republicans could say they voted yes on while Dems filibustered it anyways.

Republicans in the Senate are NOT unified. However, he can easily get 30+ republican votes on any compromise made with the WH tomorrow. Hence, he needs a Dem compromise.

So what you're saying is, rather than compromise and give the Dems more of what they want, he's perfectly fine with going along with the portion of his party that wants nothing at all (because ultimately, he doesn't really care either way)...and this is the Democrats' fault for not giving him more of what he wants?

---

Inviso posted...

So what you're saying is, rather than compromise and give the Dems more of what they want, he's perfectly fine with going along with the portion of his party that wants nothing at all (because ultimately, he doesn't really care either way)...and this is the Democrats' fault for not giving him more of what he wants?

He can't compromise and give Dems more of what they want. They refuse to negotiate? What do you think the WH and the Dems were doing? Trying to negotiate.

---

If Trump requests it, Mitch can get 51 votes for any relief bill tomorrow.

---

red sox 777 posted...

If Trump requests it, Mitch can get 51 votes for any relief bill tomorrow.

Not 51 republican votes, but he can get at least I'd say 35 even if the number is 40 trillion. There are senators that are gonna do what Trump wants and are for/against the relief based on the WH position in an election year. Also senators that are against a big relief no matter what. The number of votes he can leverage if Trump wants them is enough that bill would easily pass though with the Dems.

---

Corrik7 posted...

He can't compromise and give Dems more of what they want. They refuse to negotiate? What do you think the WH and the Dems were doing? Trying to negotiate.

I mean, he could. If he actually gave a shit about helping his constituents, he would negotiate and give up a TON of ground to the party that wants to give the people a LOT of money and aid. But he doesn't want that. He doesn't want to give that much. He has no problem with supporting the caucus within his own party that wants ZERO aid.

---

Mitch won't put a vote in the Senate up unless all republicans will vote yes on it. In no way before an election is he going to allow the Dems to be united in something and his party split on it and that is why nothing is going to get passed.

---

Inviso posted...

I mean, he could. If he actually gave a shit about helping his constituents, he would negotiate and give up a TON of ground to the party that wants to give the people a LOT of money and aid. But he doesn't want that. He doesn't want to give that much. He has no problem with supporting the caucus within his own party that wants ZERO aid.

Are you unable to understand what is being said here? He literally cannot get the votes without a compromise. If Trump says yes to 40 trillion tomorrow with the Dems, he can. Or any other number. The number doesn't matter. He can't get the votes without an agreement between the two. He can with.

---

Also i don't think Corrik understands that the WH can't make the Senate do anything. Like the WH can negotiate with the Dems all it wants but if Mitch doesn't want the vote to happen....it doesn't.

---

hockeydude15 posted...

Also i don't think Corrik understands that the WH can't make the Senate do anything. Like the WH can negotiate with the Dems all it wants but if Mitch doesn't want the vote to happen....it doesn't.

The way the Republican Party operates is that everyone falls in line behind the leader, which is Trump.

---

hockeydude15 posted...

Also i don't think Corrik understands that the WH can't make the Senate do anything. Like the WH can negotiate with the Dems all it wants but if Mitch doesn't want the vote to happen....it doesn't.

Lol. They don't have to but they will.

---

Under normal circumstances yea I'd agree but if it looks like Trump is going to lose the election no matter what I can see Mitch just saying no to him. Also if nothing happens before the election and Trump loses nothing will ever get passed since Trump only wants it because he thinks it will help his reelection.

---

i don't see mitch saying no to trump tbqh.

---

red sox 777 posted...

The way the Republican Party operates is that everyone falls in line behind the leader, which is Trump.

Trump has called for a bunch of good shit for people and Republicans have yet to fall in line.

He doesn't have much power right now because Republicans are working on distancing.

---

red13n posted...

Trump has called for a bunch of good shit for people and Republicans have yet to fall in line.

He doesn't have much power right now because Republicans are working on distancing.

Why would they fall in line when it can't pass the senate (filibuster) nor house? Lol.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Why would they fall in line when it can't pass the senate (filibuster) nor house? Lol.

To look good to their constituents.

The fact is they simply don't actually want to risk that something might pass. This is why nothing comes to the table.

---

red13n posted...

Trump has called for a bunch of good shit for people and Republicans have yet to fall in line.

He doesn't have much power right now because Republicans are working on distancing.

What is the good shit Trump has called for?

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

What is the good shit Trump has called for?

another check to people. unemployment extension.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Why would they fall in line when it can't pass the senate (filibuster) nor house? Lol.

Then maybe, if they actually want to pass things, they should acquiesce to the Democrats' demands more. I mean, historically, Dems have been the ones to give up a FUCKTON of political ground, just to receive minor concessions for the good of the American population. Maybe the Republicans should try that for once. Pass some really popular legislation that gives money to their constituents, if they actually give a shit about their voters. But nope. Four years and Republicans can only pass tax cuts for corporations.

---

Inviso posted...

Then maybe, if they actually want to pass things, they should acquiesce to the Democrats' demands more. I mean, historically, Dems have been the ones to give up a FUCKTON of political ground, just to receive minor concessions for the good of the American population. Maybe the Republicans should try that for once. Pass some really popular legislation that gives money to their constituents, if they actually give a shit about their voters. But nope. Four years and Republicans can only pass tax cuts for corporations.

So if Republicans want abortion banned and refuse to go for anything less, maybe the Dems should acquiesce to the Republicans if they want something done for ppl?

Very dumb argument. And literally all the gymnastics being done to act like the Dems are holy and the Republicans are evil when literally both are being pieces of shit and a deal could literally happen tomorrow with a single word on either side is silly.

---

Corrik7 posted...

So if Republicans want abortion banned and refuse to go for anything less, maybe the Dems should acquiesce to the Republicans if they want something done for ppl?

Now you're getting it. How many times have Republicans slipped poison pills like defunding of Planned Parenthood into essential bills. This is the essence of what politics have been for years, and Democrats have gotten their asses handed to them because they're ultimately the party that gives a shit about what happens to the American people. We've moved further and further right because the Republicans are allowed to hold the Democrats hostage. Well...now the shoe is on the other foot. And let's be honest here: the GOP does NOT want to help the poor and middle class deal with their monetary woes. You said it yourself: a sizable portion of the GOP Senate does not give a FUCK. They are MORE than happy to let the people suffer. Because that's what they do, and that's what they've always done, and this is what it has taken to show red state voters just how little of a shit their party gives about them.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Very dumb argument. And literally all the gymnastics being done to act like the Dems are holy and the Republicans are evil when literally both are being pieces of shit and a deal could literally happen tomorrow with a single word on either side is silly.

The Republicans arent even attempting to negotiate here.

Their position is "take what we offer or nothing".

---

"The american people need help, lets give them X dollars"

"The american people need help, lets give them Y dollars"

Those positions both agree that the american people need help, the negotiation in how MUCH help is needed.

.

But somehow you very disingenuously compare it to a topic like abortion where the two primary arguments are fundamentally opposed. Try harder if you are going to troll, Corrik.

---

red13n posted...

another check to people. unemployment extension.

Well he used executive power to extend unemployment already, right? The Senate had no reason to act on that. In fact, if he can continue to use executive power on half-assed measures, they still have no reason to act.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

"The american people need help, lets give them X dollars"

"The american people need help, lets give them Y dollars"

Those positions both agree that the american people need help, the negotiation in how MUCH help is needed.

.

But somehow you very disingenuously compare it to a topic like abortion where the two primary arguments are fundamentally opposed. Try harder if you are going to troll, Corrik.

I think the real issue is that, despite the "both sides"-ing efforts, the two arguments in this matter are fundamentally opposed as well. Democrats think there should be money given out as a stimulus. Republicans--not all Republicans, but enough to prevent the GOP from doing anything of value in the Senate--do not believe the American people should receive a single, red cent in the midst of a global pandemic. People like Mitch McConnell realize just how bad it looks for their party to be the one actively fighting against stimulus money, but ultimately they don't give a shit about stimulating the economy for your average citizen. So they offer up a pittance to make the Dems look unreasonable, when in reality, the Republicans are more than happy to give zero stimulus, and zero unemployment benefits. They just want a scapegoat to blame when their suicidal desires come to fruition.

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Well he used executive power to extend unemployment already, right? The Senate had no reason to act on that. In fact, if he can continue to use executive power on half-assed measures, they still have no reason to act.

He has to find already appropriated money to do things like this though. That is finite. And going to run out.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

"The american people need help, lets give them X dollars"

"The american people need help, lets give them Y dollars"

Those positions both agree that the american people need help, the negotiation in how MUCH help is needed.

.

But somehow you very disingenuously compare it to a topic like abortion where the two primary arguments are fundamentally opposed. Try harder if you are going to troll, Corrik.

Love when you are literally so much in a bubble that explaining the situation to people who don't know what they are talking about is trolling because their preferred party actually isn't angels from God.

---

A local DA posted this to Facebook. Its something probably everyone should realize in their jump to conclusions arguing regarding police.

---

https://nypost.com/2020/09/14/why-one-very-rich-woman-says-we-need-to-talk-about-money/

shut the fuck up shut the fuck up

---

So like, apparently this ABC Town Hall for Trump went... ...it went.

On COVID-19 "going away" even without a vaccine: "Sure. Over a period of time. You'll develop like a herd mentality. It's gonna be herd developed. And that's gonna happen. That will all happen.": https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1306043097999048705

A crying voter tells Trump at length how her mom, a fellow immigrant, died of cancer, and asks a question about immigration on her behalf. Trump repeatedly talks about how her mom died of "Covid": https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1306055155364888588

Trump claiming actually he didn't downplay COVID-19, but "up-played" it: https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1306006648683671554

Trump criticizing not-the-President Biden for not finding a way to implement a national mask mandate: https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1306037847082840066

But also claiming that "a lot of people think the masks are not good." (When pressed on who answers: "Waiters."): https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1306037715012587522

More lying about pre-existing conditions (with Stephanopoulos calling him out on his continuing efforts to try and kill the ACA as well as pointing out that Trump has been saying for years that we're "two weeks away" from him releasing a health care plan.)

---

fuller video of the ridiculous "I didn't downplay it" clip

https://twitter.com/TheBGates/status/1306086398886379521

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

https://nypost.com/2020/09/14/why-one-very-rich-woman-says-we-need-to-talk-about-money/

shut the fuck up shut the fuck up

Why? We do need to talk about money.

---

Good to see red sox is consistent in caring mostly about who truly needs help: the uber wealthy.

---

Corrik7 posted...

A local DA posted this to Facebook. Its something probably everyone should realize in their jump to conclusions arguing regarding police.

Oops

https://tinyurl.com/y5ejw9cd

---

wow so you're saying police shoot people so often because they are specifically trained to be hypervigilant of threats and to shoot to kill?

mindblowing. my perspective has been totally upended.

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

wow so you're saying police shoot people so often because they are specifically trained to be hypervigilant of threats and to shoot to kill?

mindblowing. my perspective has been totally upended.

Yeah, I don't think that link makes the point you want it to make, Corrik.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

Good to see red sox is consistent in caring mostly about who truly needs help: the uber wealthy.

That's not what I'm saying. As a society, we need to talk about money so that people can understand what life is like in different social classes. We don't want our current situation where rich people think poor people are lazy, and poor people think rich people are evil. Neither of those labels is the slightest bit useful in making anyone's life better.

---

i like how even if trump is 100% correct about how he "up-played the pandemic in terms of action," his behavior still doesn't make sense.

trump: covid isn't a big deal at all! the flu is worse!
also trump: *puts a ban on europe and china because of covid*

---

red sox 777 posted...

We don't want our current situation where rich people think poor people are lazy, and poor people think rich people are evil. Neither of those labels is the slightest bit useful in making anyone's life better.

i agree with this, actually.

also one of the most annoying right-wing talking points that needs to go away: "poor people are jealous of rich people."

---

You guys are better people than me for even giving a corrik link the time of day

---

Inviso posted...

Yeah, I don't think that link makes the point you want it to make, Corrik.

The link is exactly what it is supposed to be. That in the same situations as the police are in, you would likely act the same way or end up dead. You use 2020 hindsight with all details to act like you would act differently in situations you likely wouldn't if in them.

---

Then we shouldn't be cops either.

---

Corrik7 posted...

The link is exactly what it is supposed to be. That in the same situations as the police are in, you would likely act the same way or end up dead. You use 2020 hindsight with all details to act like you would act differently in situations you likely wouldn't if in them.

...so....are you saying it's okay that an untrained civilian and a trained uniformed police officer have the same reaction?

---

corrik digging his own grave here lol

---

Corrik7 posted...

Oops

https://tinyurl.com/y5ejw9cd

Let's blow this guys mind now and send him to talk with police from a country where they dont regularly carry a gun and yet can still arrest people.

Also the reason they cant fire a warning shot is because it could cause more chaos than shooting and killing an unarmed man? That's their reason?

And the only two options presented for what to do if an unarmed man turns and starts to walk away is shoot to kill or let him go? They arent trained in any ways to restrain an unarmed man who is not paying attention or prepared to defend themselves?

---

Also not to get too deep on anyone but each life is precious. Every person who has had their life ended has mattered. And it is much more preventable than some people want to believe or admit

---