|
Orthanc6 posted:https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1542525374235643904 He can push as hard as he wants, because it's not going to happen and he doesn't have the votes. He no longer has to do anything other than talk. There's no more chance of actually having to back this rhetoric up.
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 09:23 |
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:Are they? There are two - Manchin and Sinema - who technically have a D next to their name but don't support most of the same positions. the democratic party is in full control of the lawmaking branches of government. the democratic party is, also, incapable of using that control to do anything, because it has no mechanisms for disciplining anyone in its right. this really takes the teeth out of their assertion that if they have a little more control of the government they'll be able to do anything. because surprise! all it takes is one more Sinema and never-you-fuckin-mind, they STILL can't do anything. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 18:43
|
|
|
Best Friends posted:I wish I could live 200 years to go to the hot musical about how actually Mitch McConnell was very cool, and how he bravely supported a variety of enlightened principles. ♪One Kentuckian and the President walk into a room (Diametrically opposed. Foes.) They emerge with a "comprise". The President gets hosed (Bro.) The Kentuckian gets unlimited absolute power, the ability to do whatever the gently caress he wants. And the President goes home to Delaware to fall off his bicycle again or something (I don't write songs, okay.) BUT! No one else was in the room where it happened, the room where it happened, the room where it happened. No one else was in the room where it happened... Because you're not allowed to be in the same room with Mitch McConnell when he's running the country. [BANJO SOLO!]
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 18:56
|
|
|
Hilariously, a Florida court just ruled that Florida's abortion ban violates a provision in the state constitution that was based on Roe. So, Florida needs a constitutional amendment before they can ban abortion. (Or for the state Supreme Court to overrule the judge, since DeSantis will definitely appeal) https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1542552310093692931 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 18:59
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:538's first midterm election forecast is out: Does this account for the post RvW decision polling?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:03
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Does this account for the post RvW decision polling? There's really no way it could. It happened too recently and by design the model moves pretty slowly to brand-new changes in polling. Its going to take a while.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:"yes, last time we said if you gave us 50 votes we'd give you $2000 checks, voting rights laws, an end to covid, and a big stimulus bill, but no, really, THIS time we're good for it. pinky swear." Even if the Dems somehow summoned up the requisite 60 senators to form a majority, Sinema and Manchin would still be there, and with the added senators almost certainly several more would be weird gloryhounds so the new angle would just be, 'well we have 60 votes but we just don't have a caucus on this so we need more senators' and then the line becomes we need like 67 senators to get anything accomplished and I don't even know if that's mathematically possible before you consider things like voter disenfranchisement or the GOP just straight up stealing elections.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Even if the Dems somehow summoned up the requisite 60 senators to form a majority, Sinema and Manchin would still be there, and with the added senators almost certainly several more would be weird gloryhounds so the new angle would just be, 'well we have 60 votes but we just don't have a caucus on this so we need more senators' and then the line becomes we need like 67 senators to get anything accomplished and I don't even know if that's mathematically possible before you consider things like voter disenfranchisement or the GOP just straight up stealing elections. Don't they just need 51 to make carveouts in the filibuster?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:09
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Don't they just need 51 to make carveouts in the filibuster? 50+1, yes. I don't know why people keep focusing on 60 while they spin out like this. In a world where 60 even becomes plausible as an election result that could even remotely happen, the Dems would have the votes to change the filibuster well before then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:17
|
|
|
Rigel posted:50+1, yes. I don't know why people keep focusing on 60 while they spin out like this. In a world where 60 even becomes plausible as an election result that could even remotely happen, the Dems would have the votes to change the filibuster well before then. That's assuming the theory is wrong that there are like 12 Dem senators or whatever that have the same opinions as Manchin but are only be willing to take the heat for those opinions if they have to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:20
|
|
|
Rigel posted:50+1, yes. I don't know why people keep focusing on 60 while they spin out like this. In a world where 60 even becomes plausible as an election result that could even remotely happen, the Dems would have the votes to change the filibuster well before then. Only if they are willing to actually change the filibuster though. It's hard to say if this is true or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:24
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Don't they just need 51 to make carveouts in the filibuster? Assuming Democrats will votes as a bloc in a world where that theory has never been tested is a pretty suspect assumption. Like Manchin might say he would do carveouts but I'll believe it when I see him do it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:24
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Assuming Democrats will votes as a bloc in a world where that theory has never been tested is a pretty suspect assumption. It's an equally untested assumption though to assume that more Dems would betray the party if there were more of them. Sure it's equally possible, but we don't know, and especially we don't know during this very unprecedented time where SCOTUS is going full Palpatine. During Obama it's likely Dems would be concerned enough about precedent to preserve the filibuster. But times have changed a lot since Obama.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
Dems are trying reconciliation again in July. Pretty similar to what the reporting said was going on with negotiations before: - Half goes to deficit reduction. - A slightly modified version of the prescription drug pricing plan from the original BBB: quote:The retooled prescription drug pricing proposal is largely similar to the blueprint that Democrats put forward last year, according to three people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the deliberations. It generally empowers the U.S. government to negotiate the price of select drugs on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries, a move Democrats say will bring down costs in the coming years. - Extending the $0 deductible and $0 copay ACA plans that are set to expire in October. Plus, extending the boosted subsidies and income ranges for subsidies for ACA plans. - About 3/4 of the green energy and climate provisions from the original BBB. - Revenue raises are the same that Sinema agreed to in the original (no rate increases, 15% minimum corporate tax, 1% excise tax on stock buybacks, changes rules on how corporations can amortize depreciation and losses, and reduces the amount of write offs for foreign income.) - Everything else from the original BBB is dumped. https://twitter.com/TonyRomm/status/1542282872035352579
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Assuming Democrats will votes as a bloc in a world where that theory has never been tested is a pretty suspect assumption. No one is counting on Manchin for poo poo. The idea is about making Manchin and Sinema irrelevant after the election if the Dems win a couple seats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
According to WaPo, they finalized the prescription drug provision and plans to submit it to the parliamentarian, got Manchin's approval, and set a target date for a vote five hours before Leahy fell and injured himself. Like a black comedy or satire. Hopefully, he can vote in the next 1 to 1.5 months.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:41
|
|
|
Plot twist: Manchin and Sinema are on board, but since Leahy is laid up reconciliation fails.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
Rigel posted:No one is counting on Manchin for poo poo. The idea is about making Manchin and Sinema irrelevant after the election if the Dems win a couple seats. I would like to believe two Dems who aren't the Terrible Two would actually overturn the filibuster but again I am going to remain skeptical on that until somebody actually does it. "Irrelevant" is a strong word. I want to believe there is nobody else in the whole Dem caucus, tenured or not, who would not use the opportunity to dictate terms to the entire government but only time can tell me that. History has so far not been kind on whether or not Dems have changed as a party, there's no evidence of it yet. You don't need to convince me to vote, I will, but I do not trust the Dems to do poo poo even if we hand them 5 senators. Also if we lose the House and gain the Senate just puts us right back where we started legislatively.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:According to WaPo, they finalized the prescription drug provision and plans to submit it to the parliamentarian, got Manchin's approval, and set a target date for a vote five hours before Leahy fell and injured himself. Like a black comedy or satire. If he survives the surgery, then I assume they'll wheelchair him in for any votes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:49
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:- Half goes to deficit reduction. LOL yeah lets balance that budget in a recession loving shitlords Treasuries are going to make our cost of borrowing basically nothing but gotta treat that checkbook like it's your moms
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:49
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:According to WaPo, they finalized the prescription drug provision and plans to submit it to the parliamentarian, got Manchin's approval, and set a target date for a vote five hours before Leahy fell and injured himself. Like a black comedy or satire.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:49
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I would like to believe two Dems who aren't the Terrible Two would actually overturn the filibuster but again I am going to remain skeptical on that until somebody actually does it. "Irrelevant" is a strong word. I want to believe there is nobody else in the whole Dem caucus, tenured or not, who would not use the opportunity to dictate terms to the entire government but only time can tell me that. History has so far not been kind on whether or not Dems have changed as a party, there's no evidence of it yet. You don't need to convince me to vote, I will, but I do not trust the Dems to do poo poo even if we hand them 5 senators. We can pretty confidently say that there are 48 votes to change the rules for abortion and for election reform. After that, who knows. If the Dems gained a net of exactly two senators who were both on board with eliminating the filibuster, then we'd have some other holdout drawing the new leftmost line beyond which he can't cross. Maybe we'd get what is stalled now passed through, but then other things on the Bernie wishlist we aren't even discussing right now gets blocked. If we gained a net 5 seats, then the 6th-worst Democrat would define the leftmost edge of passable legislation, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:53
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I don’t know what the rules are about this, but I’m assuming they can maybe allow a remote vote for him? House of Representatives yes, Senate no. The Senate pretty much dismissed the idea of proxy voting even during the height of COVID.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
Monmouth released a poll about abortion a couple days ago; it p. much mirrors the conditional support for legal abortion as the Gallup data I posted last week.quote:A majority of 60% disapprove of overturning the Roe v. Wade precedent that has guided abortion law in the United States for nearly 50 years, while 37% approve. More than 8 in 10 Americans describe their view of the court decision as being a strongly held opinion. When asked about viewing abortion as a question of competing rights, 66% say the pregnant woman should be afforded more rights during the first three months, while 23% say the unborn fetus should have more rights. Opinion is split on relative rights during the second trimester – 46% say the fetus should have more rights and 44% say the woman should. During the final three months of pregnancy, 53% say the rights of the unborn fetus should prevail while 37% say the pregnant woman should have more rights.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:26
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Monmouth released a poll about abortion a couple days ago; it p. much mirrors the conditional support for legal abortion as the Gallup data I posted last week. I saw the graphic from that poll going around a few days ago and it is about as stark as you can get:  I'm honestly a little bit surprised that framing the question as "Who should have more rights?" didn't prop up the "woman" side of the poll. Or maybe (horrifyingly) it did.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:27
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I saw the graphic from that poll going around a few days ago and it is about as stark as you can get: There's a widespread, intense and depressing misunderstanding of why someone would get an abortion in the third trimester anyway. I hate this country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
. Accident. I'll report myself. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:There's a widespread, intense and depressing misunderstanding of why someone would get an abortion in the third trimester anyway. I hate this country. It more or less stems from the same source as the notion of "welfare queens" America is a giant crab bucket.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:37
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I saw the graphic from that poll going around a few days ago and it is about as stark as you can get: When there's been a successful 30-year, bipartisan campaign against the mythical "partial birth abortion" it's not very surprising; propaganda & no meaningful opposition pushback had done its duty once a sizable no. of Dems acceded to GOP framing. 63 House Democrats voted for the 2003 bill, as did 15 U.S. Democratic U.S. Senators (including one Joseph R. Biden & the current hipster himself, Patrick Leahy). (MODS: If I'm making too subtle of a point here, let me know & I'll elaborate. I'm positing a theory here, nothing more & nothing less, and I'm not "arguing" but rather elucidating why the polls have these results.) Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 20:41 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:39
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:According to WaPo, they finalized the prescription drug provision and plans to submit it to the parliamentarian, got Manchin's approval, and set a target date for a vote five hours before Leahy fell and injured himself. Like a black comedy or satire. Leahy's hip is this week's [non]rotating villain 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:40
|
|
|
Rigel posted:We can pretty confidently say that there are 48 votes to change the rules for abortion and for election reform. Adding to this, there will always be a democratic hold out stopping what people in this thread want because this thread is generally pretty far to the left of the Democratic party. Whatever "n" item that Democrats are able to coalesce around passing will never be completely satisfactory to the left and there will always be an "n+1" that the furthest right Democrat whose vote is needed will hold up. That is not a conspiracy to always have a fall guy/girl, or a controlled opposition, that is an unavoidable reality of having politics that aren't aligned with the center of the party. If you add two more Democrats that are at all to the left of Manchin/Sinema then your new leftmost constraint is the most right-wing Democratic senator after Manchin/Sinema. They will still suck, they will still hold up something you want, but what they're willing to go for will be better than what Manchin/Sinema will be willing to go for. Every n+1 Democratic senator you get that isn't further right is n+1 Democratic senators from the right boundary of the party that you can tell to pound sand. That is the basic mechanics of how a legislature functions, not a democratic party plot to have a rotating villain. (Again, speaking further on the topic of quoted post, not directed at OP) Jarmak fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 20:45
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:When there's been a successful 30-year, bipartisan campaign against the mythical "partial birth abortion" it's not very surprising; propaganda & no meaningful opposition pushback had done its duty once a sizable no. of Dems acceded to GOP framing. Agreed. Or more simply, propaganda works. There's been a 50 year effort to make abortions seem bad and even the people who ostensibly support the choice to get them have that distaste. "Safe, legal, and rare" implies they are something wrong or to be ashamed of. It's a medical procedure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:07
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Agreed. I loving despise that framing, I don't want appendectomies to be "rare" and abortions are no different.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:11
|
|
|
People also assume that third trimester abortions happen a lot more frequently than they do. It's less than 1% of abortions and almost all of them are for medical reasons. If you banned all abortions after 15 weeks, you would only ban ~7% of abortions. But, people estimate that most women are waiting 25-30 weeks before making a decision on a whim.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
To clarify something last night, you can post paywall bypasses in D&D, and I would go so far as to encourage doing so if necessary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I saw the graphic from that poll going around a few days ago and it is about as stark as you can get: That's a terrible poll question, it'd be hard for it to be more designed to generate that result.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:18
|
|
|
Yeah, the Gallup questions were much clearer: The Court could've preserved the 15-week MS limit & most voters probably wouldn't have blinked at the result.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:30
|
|
|
I wodner if the people who say that abortion should be illegal in the last 3 months of pregnancy actually stop and think about who's getting abortions at that time. While I don't have the exact stats, I can imagine that almost 95% of the woman who have to have that specific procedure are doing it for health reasons and not for reasons of not wanting a baby. Who's going to go through 7-8-9 months of hell, illness, bloating, discomfort and then say "Ah fuckit, lets get rid of this thing in my belly!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
Cimber posted:I wodner if the people who say that abortion should be illegal in the last 3 months of pregnancy actually stop and think about who's getting abortions at that time. What if she tried to trap a man and he didn't stay trapped?!?!?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 09:23 |
|
|
Cimber posted:I wodner if the people who say that abortion should be illegal in the last 3 months of pregnancy actually stop and think about who's getting abortions at that time. They absolutely do not
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 21:44
|
|