news Biden praises GOP as "responsible, working in good faith". "Bipartisanship is back!"

[Vroom Vroom]

46 minutes ago, VOSS said:

He’s playing 4D chess, trying to trigger the Freedom Caucus so they end up removing McCarthy as speaker and cause more chaos in the party  

I was thinking that when I watched the speech, but I’m not sure if his team is that politically savvy 

[stjosephprey4us]

Ummm

[If U Seek Amy]

People can think and say whatever they want and interpret data how they want. But many Midwest/Pennsylvania moderates/independents (many of which being key states you need to win) eat this **** up. Not saying that Biden won or did anything meaningful, but that is how people are around here. But this messaging exists for a reason. They don't really keep up too much on what is actually going on and don't follow the details and effects of policies. They just like to feel like things are stable and normal and they remain comfortable. And that is through a government that compromises on both sides, and they perceive work is being done. Even if a more extremist shift would be better for them, most fear that type of change too fast, even if they don't know why and don't think a lot about it. If using logic worked for most voters, it would be relatively easy to win for anyone with a brain and data. Most voters tend to vote based on how they feel/how things are. Or at least how changing what they have will make them feel (would the alternative feel worse to them?). Biden is not what is best for us at all, but if Biden wants to win against Trump in 2024 he just needs to make them feel like they will be more comfortable with him and he is the better alternative. And him and his team are trying to accomplish that. As long as they keep that going and get inflation down by election time, barring any other new emergencies, if it is him vs Trump he will probably be fine. On top of it just keep riding off anti-abortion and everything republicans are banning/trying to ban. It is working too because many of the midestern moderates I have spoken to irl (though I realize still a sampling size) think this anti-abortion/book banning/anti-lgbt stuff is way too far and will be voting democrat unless a better republican candidate comes out. And those views tend to be similar amongst the same demographic. You can even carry much of this into states like Arizona/Nevada and basically guarantee the white house. Georgia seems to still lean Democrat (though this is one of the least safe), but he has a ton of room to lose and still win. Not good for the country, but he is being a smart politician to secure a win ig

[EnigmaticAndroid]

18 hours ago, khalyan said:

That fall knocking the rest of his sense out of him 

[Communion]

1 hour ago, If U Seek Amy said:

People can think and say whatever they want and interpret data how they want. But many Midwest/Pennsylvania moderates/independents (many of which being key states you need to win) eat this **** up. Not saying that Biden won or did anything meaningful, but that is how people are around here. But this messaging exists for a reason. 

Around here? Don't you live in Ohio? That Biden lost by like 9 points?

 

I'm sorry but a rural-suburban white moderate in Ohio who loves bipartisanship because they care more about low taxes than people having rights is not the average Biden swing voter.

 

It's a working class Latina millennial with immigrant parents living in Michigan deciding if she cares enough or not to go vote once her second shift as a health aide in a nursing home is done. 

Edited June 3, 2023 by Communion

[Cheers]

Can’t stand him. Will not be surprised if a Republican wins.

[worldwide angel]

there's something that i want to say but i don't need a WP so i'll say this instead 

 

i love that he carelessly walks without watching his step, i hope that happens more often 

 

but seriously, its not even about being naive...when people tell you who they are, believe them. voting for biden may have stalled a quicker descent into overt fascism but he's always been "centrist", i'll say that.

[HeavyMetalAura]

I hate the GOP as much the rest of us and recognize that they’ve descended into Nazi-like madness the past few years, but like… y’all critics realize promoting bipartisanship is the ONLY way the USA can work?   It’s either that or something very extreme and deadly. No one should be criticized for promoting it or for acknowledging when it happens

[ClashAndBurn]

19 hours ago, fab said:

Not ya'll thinking Biden is naive, ya'll keep underestimating that man. He and his advisors know what they're doing. They're aware of what the GOP is, they just know how to handle them, at least for the moment 

Handling? He got completely dog-walked by McCarthy into cutting food stamps and making sure that vulnerable student debtors go into default in September. This praising of "bipartisanship" when they were completely willing to commit terrorism on the global economy is irresponsible. It encourages them to do it again.

 

Biden is a joke. And praising him for this is asinine.

[Communion]

28 minutes ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

 promoting bipartisanship is the ONLY way the USA can work? 

Almost like the foundation of America is inherently unstable and must be rebuilt to have any progress then!

[HeavyMetalAura]

8 minutes ago, Communion said:

Almost like the foundation of America is inherently unstable and must be rebuilt to have any progress then!

I don’t disagree; and how do you propose this happens then? 
 

It will take more than just Democrats, Republicans, or Independents alone to rebuild America. We must work together — a concept known as bipartisanship. My point stands. 

[Bloo]

17 minutes ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

I don’t disagree; and how do you propose this happens then? 
 

It will take more than just Democrats, Republicans, or Independents alone to rebuild America. We must work together — a concept known as bipartisanship. My point stands. 

You can’t cooperate with people that are diametrically opposed to you. You cannot cooperate with slave traders to abolish slavery. You can only defeat them. You cannot cooperate with police to rein in police abuse. You cannot cooperate with oil barons on reining in climate change. 

[ClashAndBurn]

1 hour ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

I don’t disagree; and how do you propose this happens then? 
 

It will take more than just Democrats, Republicans, or Independents alone to rebuild America. We must work together — a concept known as bipartisanship. My point stands. 

Bipartisanship serves to maintain the status quo, and is almost always slanted towards the Republicans, whom Democrats are more often than not deferential to. There's a reason this bipartisan deal is slanted far more toward Republicans' favor even though they only hold the House while the Democrats have the Senate and the Presidency.

 

Rebuilding on the back of bipartisanship would result in a system as wholly broken as what we've got right now. We got here through the worst aspects of bipartisan dealmaking resulting in a country that is centered on the Military Industrial Complex, rejects government healthcare in favor of a privatized for-profit system, overcharges far more for less effective education compared to peer developed nations, and fails to provide for its citizens in general.

[Headlock]

1 hour ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

I don’t disagree; and how do you propose this happens then? 
 

It will take more than just Democrats, Republicans, or Independents alone to rebuild America. We must work together — a concept known as bipartisanship. My point stands. 

Are you running for Miss America, what is this nonsense both-sides statement. You cannot work with people who diametrically oppose your existence and rights as a human being. You defeat them.

[HeavyMetalAura]

1 hour ago, Bloo said:

You can’t cooperate with people that are diametrically opposed to you. You cannot cooperate with slave traders to abolish slavery. You can only defeat them. You cannot cooperate with police to rein in police abuse. You cannot cooperate with oil barons on reining in climate change. 

 

20 minutes ago, ClashAndBurn said:

Bipartisanship serves to maintain the status quo, and is almost always slanted towards the Republicans, whom Democrats are more often than not deferential to. There's a reason this bipartisan deal is slanted far more toward Republicans' favor even though they only hold the House while the Democrats have the Senate and the Presidency.

 

Rebuilding on the back of bipartisanship would result in a system as wholly broken as what we've got right now. We got here through the worst aspects of bipartisan dealmaking resulting in a country that is centered on the Military Industrial Complex, rejects government healthcare in favor of a privatized for-profit system, overcharges far more for less effective education compared to peer developed nations, and fails to provide for its citizens in general.

I understand with and agree with (most) of these points, but, once again - what do you propose? You do not want a solution in which we (Democrats, assuming you are as well) work with other political parties to rebuild our system or make it better. So what are you proposing? Would you like a Civil War? I'm failing to understand what solution it is your proposing that doesn't involve bipartisanship. 

 

I have never seen someone intelligently answer this question or answer in a way that doesn't involve violence - something the Republicans would certainly have the upper hand in considering their love of guns and violence and Democrats' aversion to them. So from where I stand, working together -- to drive the point home, bipartisanship - is the best way we can move forward. I don't like it either, but America hasn't always been this divided. I can only hope, because its the only solution I see, that we can get back to a more cooperative state. 

[CottageHore]

I’m so sick of this senile old ****

[ClashAndBurn]

1 minute ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

 

I understand with and agree with (most) of these points, but, once again - what do you propose? You do not want a solution in which we (Democrats, assuming you are as well) work with other political parties to rebuild our system or make it better. So what are you proposing? Would you like a Civil War? I'm failing to understand what solution it is your proposing that doesn't involve bipartisanship. 

 

I have never seen someone intelligently answer this question or answer in a way that doesn't involve violence - something the Republicans would certainly have the upper hand in considering their love of guns and violence and Democrats' aversion to them. So from where I stand, working together -- to drive the point home, bipartisanship - is the best way we can move forward. I don't like it either, but America hasn't always been this divided. I can only hope, because its the only solution I see, that we can get back to a more cooperative state. 

This is a naïve fantasy. Every word of it.

 

Bipartisanship means Republican governance wins. Democrat governance provides a few short years of stasis before further backsliding and regression.

 

It's ridiculous when Joe Biden touts his bipartisan surrender deal as a win, and it's ridiculous when you say we need to rebuild on the back of bipartisanship when that would just result in the status quo that we have now. It would be a waste of time.

 

I agree that Democrats are too weak to come out victorious in the event of violence. But that just shows how hopeless they are as a party, does it not? As if Biden's presidency doesn't show that already.  

[Communion]

1 hour ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

I don’t disagree; and how do you propose this happens then? 

It will take Democrats deciding that they don't want fascism to win and utilizing the tools within their power to weaken the grasp and power that Republicans have within America. It will take Democrats continually failing electorally to be forced to realize elections cannot be the end goal and that power must be utilized once obtained.

 

Biden could have used the Higher Education Act of 1965 to buoy his student debt plan. Instead he chose the weaker HEROES Act of 2001 and volleyed the fate of such forgiveness over to a conservative SCOTUS.

 

Biden could have ordered the Treasury to ignore the debt ceiling. Instead he pushed for SNAP restrictions.

 

Biden has the sole authority to issue the Attorney General to begin the process of marijuana decriminalization The AG's request is approved by one person - the head of the DEA. Biden chose to appoint a conservative anti-weed figure to that position who is against re-scheduling marijuana. 

 

Much of Biden's agenda, including the $15 federal minimum wage, could have been saved if Kamala Harris utilized her authority as VP to ignore the recommendations by the parliamentarian on what constituted a budget item that could be passed in the Senate via reconciliation and a simple majority or not. 

 

Biden openly rejected proposals to either expand the SCOTUS or introduce a system of rotating judges which directly led to the unraveling of federal abortion protections yet now he and Congressional Dems ALSO refuse to call for investigations into open corruption by the court's boldest conservatives that demand removal from the court.

 

Bipartisanship is literally the last thing that Democrats need. It's like saying the way to have stopped the nazis in Germany in the 1920s was to openly work with and push for bipartisanship with the Nazi Party.

[Headlock]

30 minutes ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

 

but America hasn't always been this divided. 

False! It always has been. What has changed is that the people who have historically been discriminated against never had this large of a voice or the extent of power that they do now. Now, we have platforms to tangibly push back against the status quo, and that is freaking out those who have historically held power.

[CottageHore]

45 minutes ago, Headlock said:

False! It always has been. What has changed is that the people who have historically been discriminated against never had this large of a voice or the extent of power that they do now. Now, we have platforms to tangibly push back against the status quo, and that is freaking out those who have historically held power.

Oh wow 

[HeavyMetalAura]

3 hours ago, Communion said:

It will take Democrats deciding that they don't want fascism to win and utilizing the tools within their power to weaken the grasp and power that Republicans have within America. It will take Democrats continually failing electorally to be forced to realize elections cannot be the end goal and that power must be utilized once obtained.

 

Biden could have used the Higher Education Act of 1965 to buoy his student debt plan. Instead he chose the weaker HEROES Act of 2001 and volleyed the fate of such forgiveness over to a conservative SCOTUS.

 

Biden could have ordered the Treasury to ignore the debt ceiling. Instead he pushed for SNAP restrictions.

 

Biden has the sole authority to issue the Attorney General to begin the process of marijuana decriminalization The AG's request is approved by one person - the head of the DEA. Biden chose to appoint a conservative anti-weed figure to that position who is against re-scheduling marijuana. 

 

Much of Biden's agenda, including the $15 federal minimum wage, could have been saved if Kamala Harris utilized her authority as VP to ignore the recommendations by the parliamentarian on what constituted a budget item that could be passed in the Senate via reconciliation and a simple majority or not. 

 

Biden openly rejected proposals to either expand the SCOTUS or introduce a system of rotating judges which directly led to the unraveling of federal abortion protections yet now he and Congressional Dems ALSO refuse to call for investigations into open corruption by the court's boldest conservatives that demand removal from the court.

 

Bipartisanship is literally the last thing that Democrats need. It's like saying the way to have stopped the nazis in Germany in the 1920s was to openly work with and push for bipartisanship with the Nazi Party.

All fabulous ideas!… until you remember that Republicans, once in power, can also use similar loopholes/strategies to curtail the Democrats’ progress. And if you haven’t noticed, they have been. The Republicans might be (generally) racist, gun-crazed maniacs, but you can’t deny they are also organized. These strategies you outlined - while (mostly) correct - can be used against us just as easily as we can use them ourselves. Eventually, the collaboration and compromise we call bipartisanship simply must happen for the sustained health of country. The tools you’ve mentioned don’t change the need for that. Republicans, unfortunately, aren’t going away anytime soon. If we don’t kill them, we have to live with them. If we live with them, we have to work with them. If we don’t attempt to work with them, we’re dictators. If we’re dictators, then we’re the problem now.

Bipartisanship does not mean we must accept bigotry. We can fight that while still working together for the greater good as there is simply no other way. I hate it just as much as you do that we must reason with racists, but that’s been the way it is from the beginning of time. I don’t think the solution to that is going to be found on ATRL. In the meantime, bipartisanship. 
 

3 hours ago, Headlock said:

False! It always has been. What has changed is that the people who have historically been discriminated against never had this large of a voice or the extent of power that they do now. Now, we have platforms to tangibly push back against the status quo, and that is freaking out those who have historically held power.

False! America is statistically more divided now than it has been in recent history. Polling and studies have consistently shown that animosity toward the opposing party among the public is higher now than in recent years; that people are more weary of sharing their opinions in recent years because of this perceived animosity increase; and that people are more likely to display animosity in tangible ways (violence, non-peaceful protesting, firing someone from a job for having a perceived “unethical” opinion, etc) than at certain times in the past, proving my statement that America hasn’t always been this divided to be correct. I beg of you to please read a book, a scientific journal, or at least use Google before quoting me (as you so often do!) because you have a bad habit of stating your perception as though it is fact. 

Edited June 4, 2023 by HeavyMetalAura

[Communion]

37 minutes ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

 If we don’t attempt to work with them, we’re dictators. If we’re dictators, then we’re the problem now.

???????

Liberalism is a form of brain cancer at this point 

[Headlock]

41 minutes ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

False! America is statistically more divided now than it has been in recent history. 

How “recent” is this history you are referencing 

Cause I’m glancing to the LA riots, the Civil Rights Movement, the Stonewall Riots, Roe v Wade igniting the moral majority of right-wing politics, the Vietnam War, McCarthyism etc.

Oh yeah, and that lil squabble we had in the 1850s too 

 

You believe these instances are more frequent now because of social media broadcasting every situation to you in real time. Because the victims of this violence and prejudice are able to RESPOND and actually be heard without being stifled or censored by newspapers or television.

 

You, once again, fail to understand how reactionary politics works. People are afraid to speak their minds (ie afraid to saw their racist/homophobic/prejudiced thoughts out loud outside of their family and friends) because their words now have consequences that they never did before. And this is also becoming a false statement as well because more and more of the right-wing is becoming more emboldened than ever to speak their minds. Nothing you see today is new, it just hasn’t been caught on camera before or documented on a global scale. People didn’t suddenly decide to be hateful towards POC or gay people, they at best learned to tolerate it when their politics stayed in the shadows or were used for a laugh on a sitcom.

 

I feel your lack of forethought in this is ironically perfectly summed up by these two sentences you just wrote, in the same paragraph, mind you:

 

41 minutes ago, HeavyMetalAura said:

Bipartisanship does not mean we must accept bigotry.
 

I hate it just as much as you do that we must reason with racists, but that’s been the way it is from the beginning of time.

You directly contradict yourself in your own words in the same paragraph. And yet you are telling me to ~read a book~ 

Do you think racists were reasoned with when slavery was ended? Do you think racists were reasoned with when segregation was made illegal? When interracial marriage was legalized? When the Civil Rights Act was passed? Do you think everyone sat around a campfire in even-toned voices and compromised? No, the racists were defeated. Violence or use of force is not desirable, but it is pure historical revisionism to act like any form of real, tangible progress ever was resolved without it occurring.

Compromising implies an equal amount of assets and ideas on both sides. It implies validity in the ideas both sides are bringing to the table, with the issues being to deal with the ideas that oppose each other. This does not exist in American politics. Prejudice is not valid. Discrimination is not valid. Crushing the working class with the burden of debt is not valid. You do not compromise with someone holding a gun to your head asking if they would ~please use an axe instead~.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Headlock

[Headlock]

1 minute ago, Communion said:

???????

Liberalism is a form of brain cancer at this point 

They’re horseshoe theory-ing themselves into the 5th dimension 

[HeavyMetalAura]

10 hours ago, Communion said:

???????

Liberalism is a form of brain cancer at this point 

How interesting that you ignored every other valid point in my post to quote the only part of it that could be deemed a mild exaggeration! Here are some tips you may find helpful: https://virtualspeech.com/blog/guide-to-debating

 

Thankfully I don’t need to exclude any valid points from your posts when I quote you to boost my argument, as you haven’t made them.