Politics The Joe Biden Thread (4 Viewers)

[Phatguysrule]

Bernie isn't president because he couldn't get as many votes as Hillary or Joe. It's literally that simple. People vote for - or against - candidates for all sorts of reasons.



So, if Bernie were President, would Joe Manchin be more progressive? I'm open to arguments why he would, but I don't immediately see it.

barfo

Yep, that's correct. Because people are convinced to vote against their own interests, with the help of a bought and paid for DNC.

Joe Manchin would have far more pressure applied to him if Bernie Sanders were president. No question about it.

 

[barfo]

Yep, that's correct. Because people are convinced to vote against their own interests, with the help of a bought and paid for DNC.

Not sure what you mean? Joe Manchin is voting against his own interests? I'd say he is voting very selfishly for his own interests, against the interests of his voters, his party, and his country.

Edit: oh, sorry, I think you meant that the voters who voted for someone other than Bernie were voting against their own interests. That should have been obvious to me.

Joe Manchin would have far more pressure applied to him if Bernie Sanders were president. No question about it.

I'm just not sure that's true, or, even if it was true, that it would have any effect. Why do you think Bernie pressuring Manchin would result in Manchin caving? What power does Bernie have over Manchin that Biden doesn't?

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

Not sure what you mean? Joe Manchin is voting against his own interests? I'd say he is voting very selfishly for his own interests, against the interests of his voters, his party, and his country.

Edit: oh, sorry, I think you meant that the voters who voted for someone other than Bernie were voting against their own interests. That should have been obvious to me.



I'm just not sure that's true, or, even if it was true, that it would have any effect. Why do you think Bernie pressuring Manchin would result in Manchin caving? What power does Bernie have over Manchin that Biden doesn't?

barfo

That's the thing. Biden has the power to push public opinion against Manchin if he doesn't support the policy. He's choosing not to use it.

Trump used that power incredibly effectively, and Bernie would use it as well.

 

[andalusian]

That's the thing. Biden has the power to push public opinion against Manchin if he doesn't support the policy. He's choosing not to use it.

Trump used that power incredibly effectively, and Bernie would use it as well.

Trump used the power effectively against his own party members - and ineffectively against the American people - as he lost the presidency and his party lost the senate and house because of his tactics.

I would argue that Biden, smartly, is working not to lose the support of the American people by trying to find a compromise that works for many people. I think Bernie makes a lot of sense in his suggested policies - but Biden makes more sense in his ability to recognize the physics of the situation. The USA is a big big boat to turn around and Biden is starting the process of turning it - where Bernie wants to treat it like a whitewater raft.

I am going to argue that Biden's ability to recognize the physics will lead, in time, to the direction Bernie preaches for.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Trump used the power effectively against his own party members - and ineffectively against the American people - as he lost the presidency and his party lost the senate and house because of his tactics.

I would argue that Biden, smartly, is working not to lose the support of the American people by trying to find a compromise that works for many people. I think Bernie makes a lot of sense in his suggested policies - but Biden makes more sense in his ability to recognize the physics of the situation. The USA is a big big boat to turn around and Biden is starting the process of turning it - where Bernie wants to treat it like a whitewater raft.

I am going to argue that Biden's ability to recognize the physics will lead, in time, to the direction Bernie preaches for.

The party members are the problem. Not the American people. The American people are not going turn against a president for forcing the enactment of popular legislation... Biden forcing that legislation through early in his presidency would show that its good for most Americans without costing most Americans more money.

Trump did it to force unpopular legislation, AND STILL KEPT HIS BASE!

 

[andalusian]

The party members are the problem. Not the American people. The American people are not going turn against a president for forcing the enactment of popular legislation... Biden forcing that legislation through early in his presidency would show that its good for most Americans without costing most Americans more money.

Every registered voter can vote in the Democratic primaries. I would argue that if the American people were so gung ho about Bernie - they would have done so and won him the nomination. Given that they were not - the party members that elected Biden over Bernie seem like a good representation of the American people.

Trump did it to force unpopular legislation, AND STILL KEPT HIS BASE!

But, as mentioned before, lost the general elections for the presidency and both chambers of the legislative arm of government. Given that, the logical thing for Biden to do is not to follow suit - but do what he believes and what the American people have voted for - both in the primary and the general election - a left leaning centrist.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Every registered voter can vote in the Democratic primaries. I would argue that if the American people were so gung ho about Bernie - they would have done so and won him the nomination. Given that they were not - the party members that elected Biden over Bernie seem like a good representation of the American people.



But, as mentioned before, lost the general elections for the presidency and both chambers of the legislative arm of government. Given that, the logical thing for Biden to do is not to follow suit - but do what he believes and what the American people have voted for - both in the primary and the general election - a left leaning centrist.

Actually no. Registered independents cannot vote on many democratic or republican primaries. Just one way the primaries are undemocratic and rigged to consolidate power between two major parties.

Which is less competition than pretty much any industry or business in the world. Shocking that a candidate who actually wants to move power from both parties to the people instead would have trouble winning a primary for either party...

Again, none of that has anything to do with the fact that forcing through popular legislation would not hurt the democrats.

Trump was hurt by forcing through incredibly unpopular legislation and generally being an embareassing and despicable human being.

 

[andalusian]

Actually no. Registered independents cannot vote on many democratic or republican primaries. Just one way the primaries are undemocratic and rigged to consolidate power between two major parties.

Sorry, but that is just a silly take. If you say I am not one or the other - do not come and complain you can not vote in their primaries. If Bernie fans want to influence the Democratic primaries - where Bernie runs - they should register as Democrats. It is not an unreasonable idea.

Can't have your cake and eat it too. If you are married to the idea that you are not an independent - do not complain about the Democratic party primaries. If you care about what happens there - register as one.

 

[barfo]

That's the thing. Biden has the power to push public opinion against Manchin if he doesn't support the policy. He's choosing not to use it.

What does he gain by pushing public opinion against Manchin? Manchin is from the reddest state in the country. He doesn't care what people from other states think. He cares whether West Virginians will re-elect him. Can Biden (or Bernie) push WV public opinion against Manchin for not being more progressive? Seems unlikely.

The outcome would simply be to make Manchin angry, and to increase the odds of another Republican senator when his term expires. That doesn't help anyone.

Actually no. Registered independents cannot vote on many democratic or republican primaries.

It's trivial to change registration if one wants to vote in a primary.

barfo

 

[Minstrel]

A big issue that people don't seem aware of (or ignore for convenience sake) is that all Democrats don't have the same priorities and incentives. If you want to win the Senate, you have to win states that don't tilt towards your party at the national level--which means the only people from your party who can win there are ones who are less like your national party. Obviously. If that state was similar to your national party, you'd win that state at the national level.

So Democratic senators from red states are more conservative, often much more conservative, than the national party. The types of pressures that affect the party at a national level don't affect individual Democrats from states that tilt conservative. Manchin doesn't have the same incentives that Chuck Schumer does, or that Joe Biden does. His incentives lie in being just conservative enough to be acceptable to a majority of West Virgians (people from one of the redder states in the nation) and being just liberal enough to be acceptable as a Democrat. Putting "progressive pressure" on Manchin is meaningless--that's not a pressure he experiences. Even the Democrats in West Virginia are not extremely progressive. The progressive activists in other states don't matter even a tiny bit to Manchin. They don't affect his electoral calculus.

That's the reality that Biden, Schumer and other elected Democrats have to deal with. Saying "Just put more pressure on him" sounds great, but only if you ignore the political realities at play.

 

[Phatguysrule]

What does he gain by pushing public opinion against Manchin? Manchin is from the reddest state in the country. He doesn't care what people from other states think. He cares whether West Virginians will re-elect him. Can Biden (or Bernie) push WV public opinion against Manchin for not being more progressive? Seems unlikely.

The outcome would simply be to make Manchin angry, and to increase the odds of another Republican senator when his term expires. That doesn't help anyone.



It's trivial to change registration if one wants to vote in a primary.

barfo

You call his bluff. He can't afford to be the Democrat who stops anybody from getting stimulus. He'd definitely be voted out for that.

Yes, it is trivial. About as trivial as getting a voted ID I'd guess... About as trivial as requiring in person voting in many states.

But those things aren't considered very democratic either.

 

[Phatguysrule]

A big issue that people don't seem aware of (or ignore for convenience sake) is that all Democrats don't have the same priorities and incentives. If you want to win the Senate, you have to win states that don't tilt towards your party at the national level--which means the only people from your party who can win there are ones who are less like your national party. Obviously. If that state was similar to your national party, you'd win that state at the national level.

So Democratic senators from red states are more conservative, often much more conservative, than the national party. The types of pressures that affect the party at a national level don't affect individual Democrats from states that tilt conservative. Manchin doesn't have the same incentives that Chuck Schumer does, or that Joe Biden does. His incentives lie in being just conservative enough to be acceptable to a majority of West Virgians (people from one of the redder states in the nation) and being just liberal enough to be acceptable as a Democrat. Putting "progressive pressure" on Manchin is meaningless--that's not a pressure he experiences. Even the Democrats in West Virginia are not extremely progressive. The progressive activists in other states don't matter even a tiny bit to Manchin. They don't affect his electoral calculus.

That's the reality that Biden, Schumer and other elected Democrats have to deal with. Saying "Just put more pressure on him" sounds great, but only if you ignore the political realities at play.

Again, it worked really well for Trump on some pretty unpopular legislation. If it had been popular legislation early in his term which people would benefit from by end of his term, and he weren't a disgusting piece of trash he'd still be our president.

It's not ignoring reality if we've seen it done without repercussions. Trump pushed that unpopular legislation through which benefited nobody but the rich and both the house and senate Republicans did better than expected on election day.

 

[Minstrel]

It's not ignoring reality if we've seen it done without repercussions. Trump pushed that unpopular legislation through which benefited nobody but the rich and both the house and senate Republicans did better than expected on election day.

You keep focusing on the risks to Biden. That's not what I'm talking about. My entire post was about how Manchin isn't affected by progressive pressure. "Just pressure him" isn't a magic spell--you need leverage over someone in order to pressure them. With a very small progressive presence in West Virginia (the Democrats in West Virginia are much more conservative than the Democrats in Oregon, or New York or California, etc), there is no leverage to use against Manchin. There isn't a big, angry liberal base in West Virginia to turn against Manchin. There are conservative Democrats, there are conservative independents and there are Republicans. That's what makes a (deeply) red state a deeply red state.

That is the reality you're ignoring. Manchin doesn't have the same pressures and incentives as most other Democrats, because he comes from a state that doesn't have many liberals. There is no way to pressure Manchin from the left--his big worries come from being too liberal for West Virginia.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You keep focusing on the risks to Biden. That's not what I'm talking about. My entire post was about how Manchin isn't affected by progressive pressure. "Just pressure him" isn't a magic spell--you need leverage over someone in order to pressure them. With a very small progressive presence in West Virginia (the Democrats in West Virginia are much more conservative than the Democrats in Oregon, or New York or California, etc), there is no leverage to use against Manchin. There isn't a big, angry liberal base in West Virginia to turn against Manchin. There are conservative Democrats, there are conservative independents and there are Republicans. That's what makes a (deeply) red state a deeply red state.

That is the reality you're ignoring. Manchin doesn't have the same pressures and incentives as most other Democrats, because he comes from a state that doesn't have many liberals. There is no way to pressure Manchin from the left--his big worries come from being too liberal for West Virginia.

I understand that. Then force him to vote that way. A large portion of those conservative democrats, independents, and republicans wanted those checks.

By not forcing him to vote NO they are letting him off the hook.

 

[barfo]

I understand that. Then force him to vote that way. A large portion of those conservative democrats, independents, and republicans wanted those checks.

By not forcing him to vote NO they are letting him off the hook.

First off, he did vote FOR the stimulus package, which included most of what Biden asked for. Didn't get the $15/hr minimum wage, fewer people got checks, but in the end he did vote for the package.

How do you propose to force him to vote for things he doesn't want to?

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

First off, he did vote FOR the stimulus package, which included most of what Biden asked for. Didn't get the $15/hr minimum wage, fewer people got checks, but in the end he did vote for the package.

How do you propose to force him to vote for things he doesn't want to?

barfo

I didn't. I specifically said force him to vote no. Come to the table with the $2k promised and force him to vote no on it if he's opposed. Call his bluff.

Unless you don't really want to give the people $2k, as I believe Biden and most democrats do not. After all, that's money which could be going to their donors.

 

[jonnyboy]

This has to be some advanced form of trolling. They can’t be serious with headlines like this.

 

[barfo]

I didn't. I specifically said force him to vote no. Come to the table with the $2k promised and force him to vote no on it if he's opposed. Call his bluff.

Unless you don't really want to give the people $2k, as I believe Biden and most democrats do not. After all, that's money which could be going to their donors.

I'm not sure where people got the idea that Biden was promising a $2k check - it was always intended to be $600 + $1400 = $2000.
So I guess I've been misunderstanding you (again).

But ok, yes, Biden could have forced Manchin to vote no on a $2k check (or, more to the actual point, the $15/hr minimum). But that wouldn't have been calling his bluff, because he wasn't bluffing. He would have voted no, as promised. So then what would Biden have gained, exactly? Exposing Manchin as not-really-very-progressive? That's already known.

barfo

 

[barfo]

This has to be some advanced form of trolling. They can’t be serious with headlines like this.
View attachment 37432

The first few paragraphs of the article:

President Biden’s stimulus package, which passed the Senate on Saturday, represents one of the most generous expansions of aid to the poor in recent history, while also showering thousands or, in some cases, tens of thousands of dollars on Americans families navigating the coronavirus pandemic.

The roughly $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which only Democrats supported, spends most of the money on low-income and middle-class Americans and state and local governments, with very little funding going toward companies. The plan is one of the largest federal responses to a downturn Congress has enacted and economists estimate it will boost growth this year to the highest level in decades and reduce the number of Americans living in poverty by a third.

This round of aid enjoys wide support across the country, polls show, and it is likely to be felt quickly by low- and moderate-income Americans who stand to receive not just larger checks than before, but money from expanded tax credits, particularly geared toward parents;enhanced unemployment; rental assistance; food aid and health insurance subsidies.


As Joe would say, it's a big fucking deal.

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

I'm not sure where people got the idea that Biden was promising a $2k check - it was always intended to be $600 + $1400 = $2000.
So I guess I've been misunderstanding you (again).

But ok, yes, Biden could have forced Manchin to vote no on a $2k check (or, more to the actual point, the $15/hr minimum). But that wouldn't have been calling his bluff, because he wasn't bluffing. He would have voted no, as promised. So then what would Biden have gained, exactly? Exposing Manchin as not-really-very-progressive? That's already known.

barfo

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbr...2000-checks-will-go-out-the-door-immediately/

After $600 had already been passed, Joe was promising $2k checks would go out immediately.

""If you send Jon and the Reverend to Washington, those $2,000 checks will go out the door, restoring hope and decency and honor for so many people who are struggling right now," Biden said, making his closing argument for the Democrats at a campaign event in Atlanta on Monday."

Not anything about "another $1400" , or "a total of $2000 when you combine the last package Trump just signed with the first package I will sign".

The dude doesn't support good policy that helps the poor or Middle class. He never really has... Everything Biden does turns into a bloated mess.

That said, he's a HUGE improvement over Trump.

Again, if you force him to vote no it only hurts him, while showing you aren't full of hot air. But we all knew Biden was full of it.

Again, I'm not surprised. This is what I expected. Just like he won't support single payer. He won't support net neutrality. He won't support forgiving student loan debt, he won't fix the immigration system. Or make meaningful progress on fighting climate change.

He won't support anything that's actually good for the people unless he's absolutely forced to do it

 

[Lanny]

What does he gain by pushing public opinion against Manchin? Manchin is from the reddest state in the country. He doesn't care what people from other states think. He cares whether West Virginians will re-elect him. Can Biden (or Bernie) push WV public opinion against Manchin for not being more progressive? Seems unlikely.

The outcome would simply be to make Manchin angry, and to increase the odds of another Republican senator when his term expires. That doesn't help anyone.



It's trivial to change registration if one wants to vote in a primary.

barfo

Redder than Alabama? I think not.

 

[stampedehero]

Biden's big relief package a bet gov't can help cure America (msn.com)Here is Joe talking among common citizens at the Washington veterans center. You can tell he is working for us. What a relief from "former guy".

 

[stampedehero]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbr...2000-checks-will-go-out-the-door-immediately/

After $600 had already been passed, Joe was promising $2k checks would go out immediately.

""If you send Jon and the Reverend to Washington, those $2,000 checks will go out the door, restoring hope and decency and honor for so many people who are struggling right now," Biden said, making his closing argument for the Democrats at a campaign event in Atlanta on Monday."

Not anything about "another $1400" , or "a total of $2000 when you combine the last package Trump just signed with the first package I will sign".

The dude doesn't support good policy that helps the poor or Middle class. He never really has... Everything Biden does turns into a bloated mess.

That said, he's a HUGE improvement over Trump.

Again, if you force him to vote no it only hurts him, while showing you aren't full of hot air. But we all knew Biden was full of it.

Again, I'm not surprised. This is what I expected. Just like he won't support single payer. He won't support net neutrality. He won't support forgiving student loan debt, he won't fix the immigration system. Or make meaningful progress on fighting climate change.

He won't support anything that's actually good for the people unless he's absolutely forced to do it

Personally, I think his Trumplican detractors cause the grind and suffering simply because they want to. We have got to give Joe credit for at least doing something for the people. Trump was and will always be about himself. He had people march the vaccine through while he bloated himself on junk food, high golf scores and, of course, self admiration.

 

[Lanny]

Personally, I think his Trumplican detractors cause the grind and suffering simply because they want to. We have got to give Joe credit for at least doing something for the people. Trump was and will always be about himself. He had people march the vaccine through while he bloated himself on junk food, high golf scores and, of course, self admiration.

Trump was and is still a puke.

 

[jonnyboy]

The first few paragraphs of the article:

President Biden’s stimulus package, which passed the Senate on Saturday, represents one of the most generous expansions of aid to the poor in recent history, while also showering thousands or, in some cases, tens of thousands of dollars on Americans families navigating the coronavirus pandemic.

The roughly $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which only Democrats supported, spends most of the money on low-income and middle-class Americans and state and local governments, with very little funding going toward companies. The plan is one of the largest federal responses to a downturn Congress has enacted and economists estimate it will boost growth this year to the highest level in decades and reduce the number of Americans living in poverty by a third.

This round of aid enjoys wide support across the country, polls show, and it is likely to be felt quickly by low- and moderate-income Americans who stand to receive not just larger checks than before, but money from expanded tax credits, particularly geared toward parents;enhanced unemployment; rental assistance; food aid and health insurance subsidies.


As Joe would say, it's a big fucking deal.

barfo

Sharply cutting poverty, eh?

Id like to see the stats on that one in a month.

Stimulus is great, not dogging on Biden for that. Good on him. That WP headline is reaching for for the edge of the universe though.

The richest man in the world running a political propaganda outlet and telling people in poverty that $1400 is “showering” them with money while “sharply cutting poverty” is kind of just audacious and insulting.

 

[barfo]

Redder than Alabama? I think not.

AL: Trump 62.2%, Biden 36.7%
WV: Trump 68.6%, Biden 29.7%

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

Personally, I think his Trumplican detractors cause the grind and suffering simply because they want to. We have got to give Joe credit for at least doing something for the people. Trump was and will always be about himself. He had people march the vaccine through while he bloated himself on junk food, high golf scores and, of course, self admiration.

Oh FOR SURE!
Biden is 1000% better than Trump. And that's likely an understatement.

But he's still part of the same problem that gave us Trump. Imagine if Trump were not just a useful idiot for the right wing or Russia, or whatever. Imagine if he had a high IQ.

The thought terrifies me.

 

[barfo]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbr...2000-checks-will-go-out-the-door-immediately/

After $600 had already been passed, Joe was promising $2k checks would go out immediately.

""If you send Jon and the Reverend to Washington, those $2,000 checks will go out the door, restoring hope and decency and honor for so many people who are struggling right now," Biden said, making his closing argument for the Democrats at a campaign event in Atlanta on Monday."

Not anything about "another $1400" , or "a total of $2000 when you combine the last package Trump just signed with the first package I will sign".

I don't know, the meaning seemed obvious to me. Given that the congress had proposed $600, then Trump at the last minute said they should be $2k, then the Democrats jumped on board with $2k, then congress went ahead and passed the $600, it seemed clear that references to $2k a week or two later were references to the existing debate, not some brand new promise that just happened to be the same amount.

Again, if you force him to vote no it only hurts him

And hurting him gets you what, exactly? Would you rather have a republican in that seat?

He won't support anything that's actually good for the people unless he's absolutely forced to do it

So do you believe that the covid relief plan is not good for the people, or do you think he was absolutely forced to do it?

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

I don't know, the meaning seemed obvious to me. Given that the congress had proposed $600, then Trump at the last minute said they should be $2k, then the Democrats jumped on board with $2k, then congress went ahead and passed the $600, it seemed clear that references to $2k a week or two later were references to the existing debate, not some brand new promise that just happened to be the same amount.



And hurting him gets you what, exactly? Would you rather have a republican in that seat?



So do you believe that the covid relief plan is not good for the people, or do you think he was absolutely forced to do it?

barfo

I don't think Joe Manchin is interested in hurting himself.

I think Biden was absolutely forced to do the covid-19 releif plan. We're in a pandemic. Not doing enough on covid-19 was the lynch pin that cost Trump the election.

Biden is doing the minimum that the population will accept.

 

[Minstrel]

I don't think forcing Manchin to vote no on the bill hurts him. Because Democrats would then have to do the bill again without the $15 minimum wage (because they wouldn't just drop the bill entirely, that would be insane) and Manchin would vote yes on that. And that's all that would ultimately matter the next time he's up for re-election. If an opponent noted he voted no the first time, he'd simply say he voted no on a version of the bill that was a job- and business-killer and voted yes on the version he knew would come next that only benefited people without hurting business and jobs.

That's politics in a red state. Doing a show vote to make him vote no followed by a real vote that he could vote yes on really doesn't affect his re-election prospects at all.

Meanwhile, Democrats were up against a deadline to pass the bill (which I believe comes up next week) to renew extended unemployment benefits before they expired. Doing a useless (for the reason I gave above) show vote that endangered people's unemployment benefits (or, rather, caused a disruption in them) doesn't seem like a good choice.