politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The pragmatist argument for him was that he is probably the most progressive thing you’re going to get out of state that overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
Does he suck? Yes. But when he’s gone, that state is highly likely to vote R when an incumbent isn’t on the ballot. Progressives don’t win a lot of seats in West Virgina. The state senate and house is 90+% republican.
He’s a butt in a chair that allows Dems to have a majority and caucusing with the Dems prevents the GOP from controlling the legislation that is brought to the floor in the Senate. His voting record it’s shit. It’s only about 75% in favor of the most progressive stuff brought to a vote. The other dems vote with the party over 90% of the time.
And now he's abandoned you, and you're still defending him.
Literally nothing has changed except for a single noun. He’s still caucusing with the democrats, so the Dems still have 51 / 49 control.
They’d still have control with 50 / 50 + Harris, but the tighter the margin, the harder it gets to move shit forward.
And that said, there’s not even much of a need to push stuff through the Senate in the next 6 months. The politicians are now in campaign mode, not legislative mode.
Manchin can call himself whatever he wants. It doesn’t really matter right now.
We're back to actually calling it a majority again because Manchin needs defending. Neat.
It’s called a majority because 51 out of 100 is a majority. 50+1 people caucusing for the DNC gives the more progressive party the majority leader’s gavel and control over what comes to the floor.
Manchin’s desk could be filled by gorilla in a top hat, but as long as that gorilla is caucusing with the Dems, then it is a vote for a Democratic majority leader.
You have two options:
Those have been the two options out of West Virgina. That’s it. Gravity is real, the world is round, and West Virginians put super conservative people on the ballot.
Most people that want him in that seat don’t want him for his politics. They want him because of grade school arithmetic.
Hey man, don't forget to add some butter to that crustacean you're roasting.
When I criticize Democrats for getting so little of what they promise done, some apologist is quick to insist that the Democrats haven't had a majority in the senate and that Manchin doesn't count.
Now that someone's saying that your god is imperfect, he's crucial to what is conveniently a majority.
The argument is usually
I've had people straight up tell me that Biden never had a Senate majority to work with, right here on lemmy.
Now Democrats magically have the majority their numbers indicate, and it's all thanks to Manchin.
Nuance.
Does Biden have enough people caucusing with his party to win the majority leader gavel and prevent Mitch McConnell from dictating what gets brought to the floor? Yes.
Does Biden have enough progressives to get more progressive stuff passed? No. Two conservative democrats block that.
Arizona will be good place to fight for one of those seats, since Sinema is out and that is a swing state. West Virginia is NOT a swing state, and left leaning people need to look elsewhere for additional progressives. WV is redder than Superman’s underwear. The fact that they’ve elected anyone with a D is an outlier there.
The party will always find just enough no votes, no matter how big a majority we give them.
2008 begs to differ.
2008? When we gave Democrats a supermajority and they found enough no votes to kill the public option? When we gave the Democrats a supermajority and they didn't bother to codify Roe? That 2008?