EPTAnd meanwhile the POTUS talks basic history with more or less the same mastery than a 3 years old trying to explain the plot of spongebob squarepants.
That clip is completely surrealist.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1016
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7887 Posts
And meanwhile the POTUS talks basic history with more or less the same mastery than a 3 years old trying to explain the plot of spongebob squarepants. That clip is completely surrealist. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21665 Posts
On January 03 2019 18:49 iamthedave wrote: You keep sending clean CR's to the Senate until the country explodes.So now McConnell's said he outright won't discuss or vote on anything the Democrats send. What happens if both sides just dig in their heels and refuse? Or more likely, the Democrats keep coming up with reasonable bills and Mitch just refuses to table them? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-shutdown-mcconnell/senate-will-not-consider-house-democratic-bills-to-end-shutdown-republican-mcconnell-idUSKCN1OX01I?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=reddit.com The Democrats should have learned a valuable lesson under Obama. You do not negotiate with terrorists or Republicans. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8982 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18825 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 03 2019 23:18 farvacola wrote: The courts run out of backup money on the 11th, so look to that date as a possible watershed for havoc. What court systems does that include? I know immigration courts are going to be backed up. But does that also cover bankruptcy courts? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18825 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8982 Posts
| ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Edit; It is the PayGo rule in the House, which a bunch of progressive have jumped on as being terrible. It seems to be the brain child on conservative democrats who want to run on not blowing up the budget since the Republicans already did that. Its stupid, but also easily changed since it is only a house rule on originating bills. It wouldn't impact final votes, consolidated bills. I'm not even it impacts the amendment process. | ||
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15684 Posts
On January 04 2019 01:08 iamthedave wrote: Over on the other thread, Greenhorizons feels the Democrats are conceding tons of ground to Trump; be this so? All I'm seeing from (un)merry old England is stuff saying the Dems are holding fast. Do we really need to be taking ideas from other threads to discuss here? Kinda defeats the entire purpose of different threads. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On January 04 2019 01:40 Mohdoo wrote: Do we really need to be taking ideas from other threads to discuss here? Kinda defeats the entire purpose of different threads. It's entirely on topic, so i don't really see your problem here. Just because he's read it in another thread, rather than being told by an angry trumpet, it's not worth discussing in the thread that's literally called "US politics"? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
Congress must pay for such legislation by reducing other entitlement spending or increasing other revenues Congress can, however, waive PAYGO for a particular bill with the support of 60 senators and the majority of the House of Representatives. Also, PAYGO does not apply to discretionary programs (the programs Congress funds each year through the appropriations process), which are limited instead by the annual spending targets set in congressional budget plans. Taxes need to go back up. The Ryan/Trump tax cuts were dumb. This does mean that progs can't pass some unfunded legislation, which I guess kinda sucks? But is also means that suburban Dems now have something to run on and keep fake deficit hawks at bay. This could also lead to offsetting the Ryan/Trump tax cuts. This seems like a progs gonna prog issue where they cause a stink about something procedural without ever getting into any substance. https://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/national-debt-guide/glossary/pay-as-you-go-rule-definition/ EDIT: I get the argument AOC is making here. PAYGO is less prog than !PAYGO, thus it is bad because anything less prog is bad. But beyond the deontological argument, is there a consequentialist argument here? What substantive evil is PAYGO going to cause? The Dem caucus can't send another dead bill for McConnell to ignore that also doesn't have associated offsets or revenue increases? | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12169 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12169 Posts
On January 04 2019 03:08 Plansix wrote: PayGo rules have been around in some form or another since 1990s and never stopped the Republicans or Democrats from blowing up the budget. I wouldn't be worried about it. It's never stopped them from blowing up the budget in ways that they want. The whole point is that we suspect, with good reason, that they don't want to do our stuff. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 04 2019 03:15 Nebuchad wrote: It's never stopped them from blowing up the budget in ways that they want. The whole point is that we suspect, with good reason, that they don't want to do our stuff. Bills that don't have enough votes to pass don't come to the floor of the House. It takes the exact same number of votes to override the rule as it does to pass legislation. It doesn't' mean they won't be debated or discussed on the floor. It just mean they won't be opened for pre-vote debate and a final vote without first receiving an override. If the centrist and leadership don't want a progressive bill to come to the floor, they don't need this rule to kill it. And if the progressives have a popular program or bill they want to bring to the floor, this rule won't stop them. It isn't magic. Edit: I get that progressives are suspicious of the leadership and the centrist, but this is the game. If the minority of conservatives in the Freedom Caucus proved anything, it is that a minority within the majority still has power. Rather than demanding the PayGo rule not exist, carve out some exceptions for things progressives want to push this congress. And remember that new rules can be put in place during the next congress. | ||
| ||
