Battle of the geriatrics - round 2.

[tippy2k2]

This might work again if Trump is the nominee or if the nominee can manage to inspire a similar degree of terror to turn out the vote. The election is won or lost by Dem turnout more than anything - there are more Dem voters, enough more that if they'd just go out and fucking vote consistently the GOP would have very few seats at any level. Even after gerrymandering, because the gerrymandering assumes a predicted level of turnout for each party - you only have so many people to draw lines around and the more seats you take by drawing clever lines the narrower the margin you have to engineer around and the easier it is to overcome by raw turnout.

We'll see for sure I suppose if it comes to pass but Biden was unsurprisingly all talk and no bite with so many of his campaign promises (especially his Youth ones like the environment and maybe the biggest F YOU to the youths if he decides to restart student loan payments in the next few months). I do not think that Gen Z is going to accept another round of "This election is too important to let THEM win but we promise NEXT time, we'll totally make sure to focus on what you want, pinky swear".

Although plenty of other generations have sucked that line down and asked for another helping so maybe I'm giving Gen Z too much credit.

 

[Satinavian]

We'll see for sure I suppose if it comes to pass but Biden was unsurprisingly all talk and no bite with so many of his campaign promises (especially his Youth ones like the environment and maybe the biggest F YOU to the youths if he decides to restart student loan payments in the next few months). I do not think that Gen Z is going to accept another round of "This election is too important to let THEM win but we promise NEXT time, we'll totally make sure to focus on what you want, pinky swear".

Although plenty of other generations have sucked that line down and asked for another helping so maybe I'm giving Gen Z too much credit.

That is generally why two party systems and election rules that promote them are bad.

 

[Seanchaidh]

I'd want to add outright banning the filibuster

Since many seem to be confused on this point (that I've seen elsewhere) I will just reiterate/remind that the only thing the Constitution currently has to say about the filibuster is that the Senate "may determine the rules of its proceedings". That is literally all it says on the matter. The filibuster is entirely voluntary. The House of Representatives could have filibusters with supermajority-requiring cloture votes just as easily according to the Constitution.

As for banning the filibuster... I suppose you could specify that ending debate in order to vote on legislation must never require more than a majority. Then high school and law students a hundred years from now (speaking optimistically?) will get to have a fun time puzzling over what made that necessary.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I honestly don't see how Biden wins against anyone this time. I didn't think Biden could do worse than Trump but I think he did somehow. Neither of them are valid candidates and won't be voting for either if this does end up being the candidates.

 

[Ag3ma]

I honestly don't see how Biden wins against anyone this time. I didn't think Biden could do worse than Trump but I think he did somehow. Neither of them are valid candidates and won't be voting for either if this does end up being the candidates.

I'm absolutely sure Biden hasn't done worse than Trump.

However, there's a lot about how well a country is doing that is outside the control of a president, such that competent presidents can preside over bad times, and incompetent presidents can preside over good times. As many voters vote on perceptions of how well the country is doing, they can therefore be inclined to choose worse candidates. There are also issues of expectation and perception; decent, but if expectations of them were higher, they will be perceived poorly.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I'm absolutely sure Biden hasn't done worse than Trump.

However, there's a lot about how well a country is doing that is outside the control of a president, such that competent presidents can preside over bad times, and incompetent presidents can preside over good times. As many voters vote on perceptions of how well the country is doing, they can therefore be inclined to choose worse candidates. There are also issues of expectation and perception; decent, but if expectations of them were higher, they will be perceived poorly.

How so?

 

[Ag3ma]

How so?

Okay, why are you unhappy with Biden?

 

[Bedinsis]

He did kinda screw up the exit out of Afghanistan.

 

[Ag3ma]

He did kinda screw up the exit out of Afghanistan.

I'm not sure how true that is: how was it going to be different?

Trump decided to pull out and Biden honoured that decision to completion. So the US armed forces went through the logistical slog of pulling out. The Taliban, perhaps obviously, launched an offensive to coincide. The Afghan government, in a damning indictment of the ineffectiveness of the preceding 20 years of "nation building", collapsed even faster than anyone imagined.

At that point, Biden could either just have continued the withdrawal, or reversed course (with all the difficulties involved) to prop the Afghan government up militarily - which also would leave the USA stuck in there for years more.

 

[meiam]

There were 3 option for the withdrawal.

Do it: What happened, following a time table setup by the Trump administration.

Delay it indefinitely: What's been happening for the last decades+.

Build up Afghanistan to where it would be able to stand on its own: Would have required a massive increase in funding, training (military but also civilian) and taken years. This was very much not what the public wanted.

Biden is essentially paying the price for not just kicking the potato down the road and letting the next person deal with it.

I think they should have done 3, but I don't see how that bill would have passed by congress/senate to say nothing of the public.

 

[Bedinsis]

I don't know if there was any better alternative; what I can say was that the exit left a lot to be desired.

 

[Thaluikhain]

It was a mess, however the mess had been brewing for long before. The US (et al, but mostly the US) had, what 20 ears to build the place up to where it could stand on it's own. Obviously they were going to have to leave at sometime, it's a bit surprising they stayed as long as they did.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Okay, why are you unhappy with Biden?

He's not a progressive. His covid response was a joke and his administration even caused Marion Gruber and Philip Krause to quit as they weren't allowed to actually follow the science. He on at least 2 occasions knowingly did things that were unconstitutional. His promised student debt relief was done in the manner most likely to get overturned when he could've literally just did it. Not that I think that's a good way to handle student debt issue but he can't even follow through on a rather simple promise and could easily do if he wanted to. The Build Back Better bill was a bigger tax cut for the rich than Trump's. I would never vote for Trump because I think he's just a horrible person and since he's like 70-something, probably irredeemable person as well as he's not changing, but I can't say he wouldn't have done better either.

Biden even blamed Trump for why schools aren't open instead of just saying schools should be fucking open just like the rest of the world.

Joe Biden Remarks on Reopening Schools During COVID-19

2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden delivered remarks in Wilmington, Delaware, on reopening schools amid the coronavirus pandemic. He called the issue of students being able to go back to school safely a national emergency and called on President Trump to provide emergency funding for...

www.c-span.org

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Build up Afghanistan to where it would be able to stand on its own: Would have required a massive increase in funding, training (military but also civilian) and taken years. This was very much not what the public wanted.

Not years; decades. Afghanistan isn't post-WWII Germany or Japan- its path to a modern centralized government is barely a dirt trail, and the Taliban has always found success by working on a tribal level instead of trying to build up a unified, federalized state. Look at how everything collapsed like a house of lead-lined playing cards when the US left- we gave them basically no warning, yes, but if there had been even the thinnest of skeletons holding things together, the government could have held together longer. The only "fast" way would be an overwhelming commitment of troops and materiel, basically militarily conquering and occupying the country like back in the second World War, and forcing the populace to adhere to our standards of government... and can you see just how well that would go over?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Not years; decades. Afghanistan isn't post-WWII Germany or Japan- its path to a modern centralized government is barely a dirt trail, and the Taliban has always found success by working on a tribal level instead of trying to build up a unified, federalized state. Look at how everything collapsed like a house of lead-lined playing cards when the US left- we gave them basically no warning, yes, but if there had been even the thinnest of skeletons holding things together, the government could have held together longer. The only "fast" way would be an overwhelming commitment of troops and materiel, basically militarily conquering and occupying the country like back in the second World War, and forcing the populace to adhere to our standards of government... and can you see just how well that would go over?

That might not be just saying things about the inherent difficulties, but about how motivated those getting lots of money to build up Afghanistan actually were.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

That might not be just saying things about the inherent difficulties, but about how motivated those getting lots of money to build up Afghanistan actually were.

The ridiculous amounts of corruption both in the Afghanistan government and abroad absolutely did not help, agreed.

 

[Ag3ma]

He's not a progressive. His covid response was a joke and his administration even caused Marion Gruber and Philip Krause to quit as they weren't allowed to actually follow the science. He on at least 2 occasions knowingly did things that were unconstitutional. His promised student debt relief was done in the manner most likely to get overturned when he could've literally just did it. Not that I think that's a good way to handle student debt issue but he can't even follow through on a rather simple promise and could easily do if he wanted to. The Build Back Better bill was a bigger tax cut for the rich than Trump's. I would never vote for Trump because I think he's just a horrible person and since he's like 70-something, probably irredeemable person as well as he's not changing, but I can't say he wouldn't have done better either.

Biden even blamed Trump for why schools aren't open instead of just saying schools should be fucking open just like the rest of the world.

Okay, but let me try to express what I'm getting here.

You want certain things. Trump isn't even going to attempt those things. Biden is sort of attempting them, but somewhat ineffectually. And yet Biden is worse than Trump? I mean, with Biden, you at least have some chance of some of these sticking. With Trump, you are guaranteed nothing.

The Build Back Better bill was a bigger tax cut for the rich than Trump's

I'm just going to say I've quickly checked a few sources, and I cannot find any that think this was a tax cut for the rich.

I cannot help but think an issue here is that column you cited is written by Jonah Goldberg, pro-Republican Party journalist. What he appears to have done is to have identified one measure in the bill that operates as a tax cut for the rich, and ignored all the other measures which are a tax increase on the rich, such as:

Imposes a 5% surcharge on modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) above $10 million.
Imposes a 3% surtax on modified AGI above $25 million.
“Modified adjusted gross income” means adjusted gross income reduced by any deduction allowed for investment interest.
For trusts and estates, the 5% tax would be imposed on MAGI of more than $200,000 and an additional 3% on MAGI over $500,000.

When viewed in total, the provisions in the bill are estimated to reduce the post-tax income of the richest 1% of the population by ~0.5-1%. So, reasons for you to be happy with Biden.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Okay, but let me try to express what I'm getting here.

You want certain things. Trump isn't even going to attempt those things. Biden is sort of attempting them, but somewhat ineffectually. And yet Biden is worse than Trump? I mean, with Biden, you at least have some chance of some of these sticking. With Trump, you are guaranteed nothing.



I'm just going to say I've quickly checked a few sources, and I cannot find any that think this was a tax cut for the rich.

I cannot help but think an issue here is that column you cited is written by Jonah Goldberg, pro-Republican Party journalist. What he appears to have done is to have identified one measure in the bill that operates as a tax cut for the rich, and ignored all the other measures which are a tax increase on the rich, such as:



When viewed in total, the provisions in the bill are estimated to reduce the post-tax income of the richest 1% of the population by ~0.5-1%. So, reasons for you to be happy with Biden.

Again, Biden and democrats SAY they want said things, but they really don't want said things. If a freaking pandemic isn't enough to get healthcare reform through, they ain't gonna fucking do it. Thus, neither are gonna do those things so then it goes to who is gonna be better or more aptly, less worse. Obviously, people can just not vote for either party.

Bernie Sanders is mentioned in the article for being against the bill.

 

[Ag3ma]

Again, Biden and democrats SAY they want said things, but they really don't want said things. If a freaking pandemic isn't enough to get healthcare reform through, they ain't gonna fucking do it. Thus, neither are gonna do those things so then it goes to who is gonna be better or more aptly, less worse. Obviously, people can just not vote for either party.

No, Biden and the Democrats do some stuff they say; this also within the context of not having the votes (fuck you Manchin and Sinema, and filibuster even if they're on board) to readily pass a lot of it. But that's the issue really. Do you want an inch instead of a foot, or nothing at all? Or do you want to roll the dice and blow the Democrats up in the hope that when the Republicans consent to let a mainstream left party be elected again, the "New Democrats" will actually be progressive?

Bernie Sanders is mentioned in the article for being against the bill.

In his own words:

NEWS: Sanders Statement on House Passage of Build Back Better Act » Senator Bernie Sanders

WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Friday issued the following statement after the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Build Back Better Act: “I applaud Democrats in the House of Representatives for uniting to pass the Build Back...

www.sanders.senate.gov

 

[Phoenixmgs]

No, Biden and the Democrats do some stuff they say; this also within the context of not having the votes (fuck you Manchin and Sinema, and filibuster even if they're on board) to readily pass a lot of it. But that's the issue really. Do you want an inch instead of a foot, or nothing at all? Or do you want to roll the dice and blow the Democrats up in the hope that when the Republicans consent to let a mainstream left party be elected again, the "New Democrats" will actually be progressive?



In his own words:

NEWS: Sanders Statement on House Passage of Build Back Better Act » Senator Bernie Sanders

WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Friday issued the following statement after the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Build Back Better Act: “I applaud Democrats in the House of Representatives for uniting to pass the Build Back...

www.sanders.senate.gov

And, look at California with a state run by democrats and no issue of not having enough votes, democrats don't do what they say. California is literally the last state I'd consider living in. We're not getting inches, maybe millimeters if that. I honestly don't see why anyone would vote for either party unless you're filthy rich.

He opposed several things in the bill.
"Now the legislation comes to the Senate where I hope to see it strengthened in a number of ways."