General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTwoflower
(1,020 posts)Demsrule86
(68,567 posts)likely lose the House...of course, some seats will remain safe...and they will lose all power for any bill.
LonePirate
(13,420 posts)Senate Dems promised a reconciliation bill with more spending. AOC wants what she was promised.
Demsrule86
(68,567 posts)against us in the mid-term.
LonePirate
(13,420 posts)The mid-terms are the next election. I want Dems elected just 9 months ago to fulfill their campaign promises and deliver on what they told voters. I don't give a damn about elections that are 15 months away.
karynnj
(59,503 posts)It has lots of needed infrastructure items including things like broadband expansion. How many of our Predidential candidates run on both of those things? Answer. All of them at least since 2000. Even Bernie.
It is fine to try to use it for leverage, but it would be asinine to actually kill this bill if we can not get a reconciliation bill out of the Senate. Sanders has said he has the votes although there are at least two possible defectors.
The best outcome is to have both bills pass. They are different and both important. However it is far worse to not pass anything.
Demsrule86
(68,567 posts)emulatorloo
(44,124 posts)AOC is terrific.
However Progressives in Congress should help make progress, rather than stymie it.
Uncle Joe
(58,361 posts)ultimately it depends on what one considers to be "good" and what one considers to be the "best."
Voltaire
Perfect is the enemy of good is a quote usually attributed to Voltaire. He actually wrote that the best is the enemy of the good (il meglio è nemico del bene) and cited it as an old Italian proverb in 1770, but the phrase was translated into English as perfect and made its way into common parlance in that form.
I believe we screwed up the true meaning of the phrase when we changed it from "best" to "perfect."
emulatorloo
(44,124 posts)Hope youre doing well Joe! Always great to see your posts.
Uncle Joe
(58,361 posts)I hope you are doing well as well emulatorloo.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Don't blame language.
Again.
Uncle Joe
(58,361 posts)You missed the main point
Again
The Magistrate
(95,247 posts)Gives people ideas, lets everybody think he or she can be a king-pin. I hate to sound like an old Leninist, but once the leadership has taken a position, it ought to bind the whole Party. We'd be in much better shape if that was how we operated. Part of the problem, viewed as mildly as possible, is that though we are not in Parliamentary system, the other side can be counted on to act the way a party in parliament does, while ours refuses to do so. A small but drilled and disciplined force will beat a large, fierce, but unorganized bunch nine times in ten.
I don't take this as a threat, for two reasons. The condition she names is what everybody knows is the Administration's plan, and if it comes to it, I expect Madame Speaker can put together enough votes to squeak by without her.
Uncle Joe
(58,361 posts)The Republican masses thought that Biff Trump was one of or cared about them, so how did they get so disconnected from their party to which had next to zero public dissension since the 1980s?
Biff was different, he spoke his mind and to too many Republicans that symbolized bravery or courage and the people could relate to it or so they thought.
I believe the other side's "discipline" aka; Ronald Reagan's 11th Commandment contributed to their internal rigidity making it more difficult for them to adapt and this in turn paralyzed them to the rise of the Trump within their own party.
By H.W. BRANDS April 05, 2017
Will Rogers, the cowboy philosopher and political pundit of the 1930s, used to joke, I am a member of no organized party: I am a Democrat. In those days, the Democrats were Americas party of dysfunction, an unstable coalition of urban Northern liberals and rural Southern conservatives. Occasionally, the two wings worked together, as during Franklin D. Roosevelts first term, but more often they clashed, right up until the party splintered during the 1960s, as Southern conservatives bailed out to join the Republicans.
(snip)
His insistence that Republicans refrain from criticizing one another was self-serving. As the favorite in the Republican effort to oust Democratic Governor Pat Brown, Reagan hoped to keep his GOP rivals from damaging him before the general election.
But Reagan had a broader vision as well. The 1964 presidential contest had left the Republicans more divided than theyd been in decades. The partys liberal and moderate wings, supporters of Nelson Rockefeller, blamed conservatives for Barry Goldwaters disastrous defeat, in which Lyndon Johnson won more than 480 electoral votes as Democrats took two-thirds majorities in both houses of Congress. Reagan had already fixed his eyes on the White House, and he knew he couldnt get there leading a fractured party.
(snip)
Reagan earned a reputation as the Teflon president, to whom scandal and criticism never stuck. The reason they didnt was that voters thought Reagan was a nice guy. Even those who disliked his policies had difficulty disliking him. He survived the Iran-Contra scandal not because people believed his side of the storypolls showed they didntbut because they didnt want to see an amiable old man disgraced.
Fast forward to 2017. The Republicans have become the party of dysfunction. They inherited the Southern conservatives who abandoned the Democrats, and are now as deeply split as the Democrats ever wereeven as they hold the presidency, the Congress, and a majority of the nations state governments.
(snip)
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/11th-commandment-gop-republican-reagan-trump-214982/
JohnSJ
(92,190 posts)Someone should inform some members of her caucus they arent the majority within the party, and she isnt the speaker
empedocles
(15,751 posts). . . and turner rankles. Haven't seen plausible rationale.
OnDoutside
(19,956 posts)get them through, it will set up a poisonous 2022 for the Democratic Party. In any case, August is the silly season, with lots of posturing. Let it all play out, and let Nancy Pelosi do her thing.
Walleye
(31,022 posts)Cuthbert Allgood
(4,921 posts)But I'm sure the person that actually is a member of Congress appreciates the suggestions of someone that is not.
iemanja
(53,032 posts)name one time.
OnDoutside
(19,956 posts)Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,984 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Wonder if this is to distract from the backlash against her. She grabbed the opportunity afforded by the end of the eviction moratorium end to cast blame on Democrats.
Callous, uncaring quasi-Republicans that we are, couldn't she let us off the hook with them?
.
AZProgressive
(29,322 posts)Glad you point that out. The Senate should do what House Dems want. Whether they do or not is a different story but my problems are with the Senate rather than House Democrats who I strongly support.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and blaming voters for not doing a better job.
In It to Win It
(8,251 posts)I don't think that should be reiterated out loud because the GOP has no real incentive for working with Dems on the bipartisan part of the deal. We want the win more than the GOP does. They would gladly side by the sidelines and watch us fail.
I think saying this gives the GOP more leverage than it gives us because we want it to work more than they do.
quickesst
(6,280 posts)There are families struggling with paying the rent. They are having trouble keeping enough food on the table. They might come for the car for lack of payment at any time. Passing the infrastructure bill will solve a lot of these problems people have. But then, AOC doesn't have to worry about any of that, does she? Anyone who agrees with her must not have any of those problems either, and can afford to take her side. My concern is with those people struggling, whose lives could be turned around for the better. Plus, as stated in previous posts, and seemingly ignored, is the fact that those people will remember when it comes time to vote again. Not only is AOC and her Progressive caucus torpedoing a chance for thousands of people to improve their lives, they will be torpedoing the Democratic Party's chances to maintain control.
I am continually amazed at some people's inability to grasp the concept that 100% of nothing is still nothing.
mcar
(42,329 posts)Once again, AOC going after Democrats instead of Republicans.
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,921 posts)Y'all that don't like AOC might want to get your arguments straight because it looks pretty foolish when people are hating on her because of the content of what she said and how that hurts "Dems" and hating on her because her content is the same as "Dems."
And I put "Dems" in parentheses to indicate language above.
iemanja
(53,032 posts)It's all her? She doesn't say, I agree with other leading Dems. She makes it about her own views exclusively. Naturally she is going to bring about criticism. She doesn't need your protection. Americans are going to disagree about politicians. It's the way it is. You aren't going to be able to enforce fealty.
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,921 posts)Are you mad at her for what she said or that she quote Pelosi/Biden?
I'm not trying to protect her at all. As evidenced by her Twitter feed, she is far more capable and talented at defending her position even if I thought I should. I am pointing out the contradictions on this thread. Including your abrupt change in position.
How about if you just all admit you don't like her and leave it at that instead of trying to come up with contradictory positions in the same thread to try to get others to not like her?
iemanja
(53,032 posts)OnDoutside
(19,956 posts)to the horse manure Sinema and Manchin have come out with.
This all needs to play itself out.