|
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 |
On January 22 2021 12:57 Zambrah wrote:
The material difference is that the Paris Climate Agreement doesn't somehow uniquely benefit parisians. Its like saying the Treaty of Versailles was really a treaty benefiting the french. Its kind of true in that its probably a good thing for the french that World War I ended, but framing it like its some unique benefit to France over anyone else is weird, dumb, and probably dishonest framing.
Add to that that in this case, the US is suffering a whole lot more from climate change than France. We don't have an increased hurricane season or devastating fires or a risk to be flooded. Maybe a hotter summer and the south is suffering a bit more from droughts (for now).
So it's not even a benefit for France over the US.
I guess he meant to say their view for America First, policy wise, it to become Flint across the US. They would have gotten his message better.
|
On January 22 2021 16:01 Zambrah wrote:Mitch McConnell continuing to be as much of an obstructionist as humanly possible, threatening to filibuster the Organizing Resolution to allow Democrats to assume their committee chair positions. Yet another reason why working with a party whose only real political interest lies in sabotaging you is a bad idea. I hope America doesn't forget that Mitch McConnell is a piece of shit whose existence is predicated upon making government dysfunctional just because he may not wind up being full on Team Trump. He's still the exact type of crappy DC scumbag that helps create an environment in the US that breeds Trumps. https://twitter.com/brianschatz/status/1352309652235702273?s=20 No point in wasting time, just get rid of the 'do nothing' filibuster immediately and go back to the older rules of actually having to talk about the subject, so if people are passionate about something there is still a tool.
This is going to happen constantly whenever the Democrats do not have a super majority.
|
I'm honestly surprised McConnell is doing this out of the gate. The current filibuster is a tool that very clearly benefits the party trying to enforce minority rule, which is the GOP for the foreseeable future. I expected him to be very judicious with it while the dems hold the trifecta, then go nuclear as soon as they lose a branch to the pandemic.
If he is using it already in such a plainly ridiculous situation, he must be trying to bait the dems into taking it away. I wonder why. Maybe he's just trying to wedge the centrists, but this line is so obviously spurious that even Manchin should flip if he keeps going.
|
Could be he feels confident that in 2022 hes going to win the Senate back. Its really not that unlikely either, its honestly quite probable. I'm sure his goal is to make it as hard as possible to do anything for these first two years 'til he can get his power back and then go back to making sure nothing happens ever again.
|
Sure, but that feels like short-term thinking from a man famous for his long game.
I agree it's likely the reps will get the senate back in 2022, but it's also likely they'll lose it again at some point. Whenever that happens, they will want the filibuster. The dems are less likely to have the trifecta than the GOP to have the senate. It took the worst president in history and a one-in-a-hundred-year catastrophe to give them the dub this time.
If you want to make sure nothing ever happens, the filibuster lets you achieve that whether you hold the senate or not. That's a big deal if you're the party of no. Over a 20-year horizon, it seems better for them to let this window pass quietly and walk away with their best weapon intact, especially since the Dems' own frenemies will keep their left wing in check on their own.
Iunno, I assume he's done his homework. It just makes me wonder what he has up his sleeve afterwards.
|
|
|
Cruz definitely knows that the vast majority of people who would take issue with how he formulated that tweet are not people who would ever vote for him, so rather than indicting his clumsy language, we should instead merely highlight that he's a duplicitous scumbag and move on.
|
On January 22 2021 12:59 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2021 12:48 Falling wrote:On January 22 2021 11:40 JimmiC wrote:On January 22 2021 11:03 Falling wrote:On January 22 2021 08:58 brian wrote:On January 22 2021 08:27 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 22 2021 06:25 Nouar wrote:
I'd really love to understand if that guy actually believes what he says or is just plainly appealing to the dumber part of the base...
I already had issues with his 180 in support of Trump in '16 (along with a LOT of other things), but does he really believes the "Paris agreement" has anything to do with the citizens of Paris ? Or am I missing something here ?
This is so painfully stupid I don't even know what to say. Cruz is an absolute pond scum. Cruz is familiar with what the name of the accord actually means. He’s not as stupid as his constituents, and that’s exactly the card he’s playing. I don't think he's trying to trick his constituents either. I think it's pretty clear it's a rhetorical flourish by using alliteration. I wouldn't assume Cruz is a dumb-dumb who doesn't understand how treaties work. So you think his base will understand that comment as rhetorical flourish by alliteration and not what it means based on the words used? Sounds super unlikely to me. What is materially different from his argument either way? The mechanics are different, but it's essentially just a "America First" message. "We don't need to worry about what is good for people out there. We need to worry about what's good for us." I think that message comes through loud and clear and would be understood by his base whatever they know about how treaties work. It's like saying people only care about Geneva because its called the Geneva convention
I feel like this was obviously a case of metonymy (or whatever it's called) which matches Cruz's rhetorical style. Is he dumb to play this angle? Absolutely. Seems like everyone here is having fun jumping on it but I'm sure it's having its intended effect with the audience.
edit: also what farv said :D
|
|
|
Finally something is starting for those two shitbirds of a feather. I hope they uncover so much shit that they have no choice but to kick them, then the birds in the House. I was curious if the Dems would look for grounds of expulsion. I think since their lives were close to being in very real danger, they're going to want to make a move. If this had been anything else, BaU.
A group of Senate Democrats filed an ethics complaint Thursday against Republican Sens. Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz over their objections to the Jan. 6 certification of the presidential election results that coincided with the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.
By objecting to the certification, Cruz, and Hawley, "lent legitimacy" to the violent mob of pro-Trump supporters that stormed the Capitol, the letter sent to incoming Senate Ethics Committee Chairman Chris Coons, D-Del., and Vice Chairman James Lankford, R-Okla., said.
The letter, spearheaded by Rhode Island Democrat Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, asked for an investigation into the two members to "fully understand their role" as it relates to the attack on the Capitol and to determine if disciplinary action is needed.
Whitehouse and the six other Democrats who signed the letter want information on whether Hawley, Cruz or their staffers were in contact or coordinated with the organizers of the rally; what the senators knew about the plans for the Jan. 6 rally; whether they received donations from any of the organizations or donors that funded the rally, and whether the senators "engaged in criminal conduct or unethical or improper behavior."
Until those questions are cleared up, "a cloud of uncertainty will hang over them and over this body," the letter said. Sens. Ron Wyden, Tina Smith, Richard Blumenthal, Mazie Hirono, Tim Kaine and Sherrod Brown also signed.
Hawley, of Missouri, and Cruz, of Texas, have defended their actions by saying they were raising objections to what they saw as election irregularities in states that voted for Biden. There has been no proof for such claims.
Hawley said Thursday that Biden and the Democrats are "trying to silence dissent."
Source
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Looks like the student loan pause now stretches out through the end of September. Not unexpected, but Biden just made it so.
I'm glad to get a few more months of reprieve on that one to be sure, but I cant help but wonder how this is going to play when it's time to start ending these blanket forbearance programs. One day our debt crisis will cause a meltdown and we might be able to push that out for several years, but not forever.
|
Bisutopia19158 Posts
On January 23 2021 02:14 LegalLord wrote:
Looks like the student loan pause now stretches out through the end of September. Not unexpected, but Biden just made it so.
I'm glad to get a few more months of reprieve on that one to be sure, but I cant help but wonder how this is going to play when it's time to start ending these blanket forbearance programs. One day our debt crisis will cause a meltdown and we might be able to push that out for several years, but not forever.
Can't pay for that, environmental reform, improved immigrant programs, restitution, and the dozen other trillion dollar ideas that leftists like Bernie Sanders are calling for. I'm not arguing that any of these programs are bad ideas or not needed, but the fact that Biden has to be selective about which programs he chooses will put him in the cross hair by political opponents within his own party.
|
On January 23 2021 02:14 LegalLord wrote:
Looks like the student loan pause now stretches out through the end of September. Not unexpected, but Biden just made it so.
I'm glad to get a few more months of reprieve on that one to be sure, but I cant help but wonder how this is going to play when it's time to start ending these blanket forbearance programs. One day our debt crisis will cause a meltdown and we might be able to push that out for several years, but not forever.
In my eyes, this level of delay has basically made it impossible for dems to resume payments. For many people, student loans are an enormous portion of their income. You can’t take that away for 2 years and expect everything to be peachy when it starts back up. Right or wrong, people will be basically unwilling to pay in October. Lots of people have accumulated a lot of credit card debt during COVID too. More broadly speaking, the financial health of the average student loan borrower is not going to be appreciably better in October. Even if we ignore the ethics and whatnot of student loan deferral or forgiveness, this will go very poorly in October. And it’s so obviously the case that I expect this time to be the time Biden and his team use to figure out a more long term solution
|
By restitution, do you mean reparations? No one has ever seriously believed those would happen, even on the far left. It's a "yeah, it should happen. Too bad it never will" level of commitment.
Anyways, the idea behind at least AOC's plans (medicare for all, green new deal) are that in the short terms these are very expensive programs, but that the long term payoff makes them necessary - avoiding healthcare reform means 30 trillion dollars in 10 years instead of 20 trillion dollars now, that sort of principle. Education is an area where we're going to need more college educated people, not less, to compete in a modern economy. Same for the green new deal (though it has some obvious issues) - clinging to coal just means that we're funding something that's going to die within a couple of decades, it's like trying to revive whale hunting in the 1910s. Same for student loan reform - it doesn't work to have the economy's heaviest spenders be paying a 30% higher tax rate than those who spend the least.
While our GDP to debt ratio is on the higher end, it's not in the top 10 and as the international reserve currency we can be somewhat less concerned about it. Additionally, the majority of US debt is held by US citizens, not foreign countries.
|
Bisutopia19158 Posts
On January 23 2021 02:44 Nevuk wrote:
By restitution, do you mean reparations? No one has ever seriously believed those would happen, even on the far left. It's a "yeah, it should happen. Too bad it never will" level of commitment.
Anyways, the idea behind at least AOC's plans (medicare for all, green new deal) are that in the short terms these are very expensive programs, but that the long term payoff makes them necessary - avoiding healthcare reform means 30 trillion dollars in 10 years instead of 20 trillion dollars now, that sort of principle. Education is an area where we're going to need more college educated people, not less, to compete in a modern economy. Same for the green new deal (though it has some obvious issues) - clinging to coal just means that we're funding something that's going to die within a couple of decades, it's like trying to revive whale hunting in the 1910s. Same for student loan reform - it doesn't work to have the economy's heaviest spenders be paying a 30% higher tax rate than those who spend the least.
While our GDP to debt ratio is on the higher end, it's not in the top 10 and as the international reserve currency we can be somewhat less concerned about it. Additionally, the majority of US debt is held by US citizens, not foreign countries.
I totally get it. And when watching a movie from 80's or 90's like "American President" that brings up environmental spending, you realize we could have had a 20-30 year jump on the word in advancing the renewable industry. I'm not arguing against any single leftist idea (not all are bad), but just pointing out Biden is going to shredded for not "doing enough" no matter how effective he is as a liberal president.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 23 2021 02:38 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2021 02:14 LegalLord wrote:
Looks like the student loan pause now stretches out through the end of September. Not unexpected, but Biden just made it so.
I'm glad to get a few more months of reprieve on that one to be sure, but I cant help but wonder how this is going to play when it's time to start ending these blanket forbearance programs. One day our debt crisis will cause a meltdown and we might be able to push that out for several years, but not forever. In my eyes, this level of delay has basically made it impossible for dems to resume payments. For many people, student loans are an enormous portion of their income. You can’t take that away for 2 years and expect everything to be peachy when it starts back up. Right or wrong, people will be basically unwilling to pay in October. Lots of people have accumulated a lot of credit card debt during COVID too. More broadly speaking, the financial health of the average student loan borrower is not going to be appreciably better in October. Even if we ignore the ethics and whatnot of student loan deferral or forgiveness, this will go very poorly in October. And it’s so obviously the case that I expect this time to be the time Biden and his team use to figure out a more long term solution
We're in such a no-win situation that the only possible "long-term solution" anyone has is hoping that MMT is real. The other option is to accept an economic meltdown and deal with the fallout, sooner or later.
|
On January 22 2021 17:43 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2021 12:57 Zambrah wrote:
The material difference is that the Paris Climate Agreement doesn't somehow uniquely benefit parisians. Its like saying the Treaty of Versailles was really a treaty benefiting the french. Its kind of true in that its probably a good thing for the french that World War I ended, but framing it like its some unique benefit to France over anyone else is weird, dumb, and probably dishonest framing. Add to that that in this case, the US is suffering a whole lot more from climate change than France. We don't have an increased hurricane season or devastating fires or a risk to be flooded. Maybe a hotter summer and the south is suffering a bit more from droughts (for now). So it's not even a benefit for France over the US. I guess he meant to say their view for America First, policy wise, it to become Flint across the US. They would have gotten his message better.
The message isn't that "Paris"/France benefits from it at the expense of the US (if you are familiar with arguments as to the opposition of the Paris Accords beside the low hanging fruit that climate change is a hoax, it's that it benefits the developing world at the expense of hamstringing the developed western world, of which the US and France are both a part), the message is political about sovereignty, about who makes decisions about US energy, emissions, and economy, the US voters, the Congress, the President, or an international agreement the signing of which may overreach the executive's authority.
If you have ever heard "Brussels" said symbolically to represent the idea of other countries making decisions for one's own in the context of countries exiting the EU, it's this kind of point being made. I personally struggle to understand the need to swear rabidly at politicians who can't hear you, what use it serves. When people have that attitude it's natural they will consistently interpret everything the other side says in the least charitable way possible, building a cumulative image of their opponents which over time has a more and more tenuous connection to reality.
On January 22 2021 10:01 NewSunshine wrote:
Cruz was also in the running when Trump grabbed the nomination what feels like 10,000 years ago now. So let's stamp out the notion that Trump was some kind of aberration, and that they begrudgingly rallied behind him. He was their perfect leader, they wanted someone who could take the mask off like Trump could, and they were happy to have an increasingly radicalized base because of him. Cruz condoned the attack on our capital 2 weeks ago. Cruz, Hawley, Cawthorne, and all the other Republicans who enabled and organized the attack on our capital need to have their asses removed from Congress and thrown in jail.
Did he condone those? As far as I know Cruz is a serious politican, unlike Cawthorne, and is also smarter than probably everyone here. Understanding starts with communication, if you don't know what your opponents are talking about, you won't understand how they think... His likability issues aside, he's extraordinarily shrewd so be careful underestimating.
On January 23 2021 02:36 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2021 02:14 LegalLord wrote:
Looks like the student loan pause now stretches out through the end of September. Not unexpected, but Biden just made it so.
I'm glad to get a few more months of reprieve on that one to be sure, but I cant help but wonder how this is going to play when it's time to start ending these blanket forbearance programs. One day our debt crisis will cause a meltdown and we might be able to push that out for several years, but not forever. Can't pay for that, environmental reform, improved immigrant programs, restitution, and the dozen other trillion dollar ideas that leftists like Bernie Sanders are calling for. I'm not arguing that any of these programs are bad ideas or not needed, but the fact that Biden has to be selective about which programs he chooses will put him in the cross hair by political opponents within his own party.
Yes, inability to prioritize in an attempt to appease all factions can leave you with no progress on the front of any particular program. If he were set on not pursuing reelection, it should help him to act without regard for potential fallout.
|
Bisutopia19158 Posts
On January 23 2021 03:00 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2021 02:38 Mohdoo wrote:On January 23 2021 02:14 LegalLord wrote:
Looks like the student loan pause now stretches out through the end of September. Not unexpected, but Biden just made it so.
I'm glad to get a few more months of reprieve on that one to be sure, but I cant help but wonder how this is going to play when it's time to start ending these blanket forbearance programs. One day our debt crisis will cause a meltdown and we might be able to push that out for several years, but not forever. In my eyes, this level of delay has basically made it impossible for dems to resume payments. For many people, student loans are an enormous portion of their income. You can’t take that away for 2 years and expect everything to be peachy when it starts back up. Right or wrong, people will be basically unwilling to pay in October. Lots of people have accumulated a lot of credit card debt during COVID too. More broadly speaking, the financial health of the average student loan borrower is not going to be appreciably better in October. Even if we ignore the ethics and whatnot of student loan deferral or forgiveness, this will go very poorly in October. And it’s so obviously the case that I expect this time to be the time Biden and his team use to figure out a more long term solution We're in such a no-win situation that the only possible "long-term solution" anyone has is hoping that MMT is real. The other option is to accept an economic meltdown and deal with the fallout, sooner or later.
We definitely need to stop allowing students to use credit cards to pay for tuition and force a maximum interest rate on these loans to a very small amount. And we need to stop idiots from paying of student loans with credit cards. These are just temporary things to slow future debt burdens while a a real solution is put in place.
|
|
|
On January 23 2021 03:00 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2021 02:38 Mohdoo wrote:On January 23 2021 02:14 LegalLord wrote:
Looks like the student loan pause now stretches out through the end of September. Not unexpected, but Biden just made it so.
I'm glad to get a few more months of reprieve on that one to be sure, but I cant help but wonder how this is going to play when it's time to start ending these blanket forbearance programs. One day our debt crisis will cause a meltdown and we might be able to push that out for several years, but not forever. In my eyes, this level of delay has basically made it impossible for dems to resume payments. For many people, student loans are an enormous portion of their income. You can’t take that away for 2 years and expect everything to be peachy when it starts back up. Right or wrong, people will be basically unwilling to pay in October. Lots of people have accumulated a lot of credit card debt during COVID too. More broadly speaking, the financial health of the average student loan borrower is not going to be appreciably better in October. Even if we ignore the ethics and whatnot of student loan deferral or forgiveness, this will go very poorly in October. And it’s so obviously the case that I expect this time to be the time Biden and his team use to figure out a more long term solution We're in such a no-win situation that the only possible "long-term solution" anyone has is hoping that MMT is real. The other option is to accept an economic meltdown and deal with the fallout, sooner or later.
Right, it is a terrible situation either way. So then that means politicians are incentivized to do whichever one doesn't result in political fallout. Democrats simply can't afford to say "go fuck yourselves millennials". Selfishly, they need to at least make millennials not angry. They will be very angry in October at the current trajectory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
