posted by SpockLOL....Trump is getting his hole agenda done.
Except:
1. Mexico paying for the wall
2. Increasing tax on the wealthy
3. Not only balancing the budget, but actually paying down debt
4. Repeal Obamacare
5. Ending our "forever wars" in the Middle East
Just to name some.
posted by SpockLOL....Trump is getting his hole agenda done.
Through Executive Action which can easily be overturned by a new admin.
Outside the tax bill, what other major item has he gotten through Congress?
I'll give Trump the Supreme Court and lower court judges.
posted by ptown_trojans_1Through Executive Action which can easily be overturned by a new admin.
Outside the tax bill, what other major item has he gotten through Congress?
I'll give Trump the Supreme Court and lower court judges.
Really? USMCA, JOBS ACT, CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM?
posted by SpockLOL....Trump is getting his hole agenda done.
We all know about the Stormy, McDougal, etc. allegations, dude...
posted by HereticWe all know about the Stormy, McDougal, etc. allegations, dude...
For all the talk about how Trump is going to destroy our Democracy, we've now heard in the debates that the Progressives want to stack the SCOTUS. And eliminate the filibuster in the Senate.
Actually, I thought Pete's idea for 15 justices was very interesting. But if you eliminate the filibuster, then every time the Senate flips the majority party is going to get even and then ram thru it's own reckless agenda.
I hope someone is smart enough to codify the filibuster into law. Except none of these politicians appear capable of thinking beyond their own re-election.
posted by gutFor all the talk about how Trump is going to destroy our Democracy, we've now heard in the debates that the Progressives want to stack the SCOTUS. And eliminate the filibuster in the Senate.
Actually, I thought Pete's idea for 15 justices was very interesting. But if you eliminate the filibuster, then every time the Senate flips the majority party is going to get even and then ram thru it's own reckless agenda.
I hope someone is smart enough to codify the filibuster into law. Except none of these politicians appear capable of thinking beyond their own re-election.
I think the idea is that they view the filibuster as a waste of time that could be better spent "getting things done."
Of course, this assumes that the things they'd be getting done are good things. Not feeling all that confident in that, so I kind of like the filibuster, even if only for that reason.
It's also entertaining, though. Maybe not a reason to keep something, but a reason I'd want to, perhaps.
posted by ptown_trojans_1Through Executive Action which can easily be overturned by a new admin.
Outside the tax bill, what other major item has he gotten through Congress?
I'll give Trump the Supreme Court and lower court judges.
You mean the do-nothing congress full of radical resistors?
posted by O-TrapI think the idea is that they view the filibuster as a waste of time that could be better spent "getting things done."
Purely partisan legislation is rarely good. The instability it would bring would be bad for business/economy. Just imagine every time the Senate flips that guns become illegal or legal. Or that your healthcare gets fucked with.
It really is one of the most reckless ideas I've heard proposed in all the years I've been voting. This only comes from an idealogue who has deluded themself into thinking they have all the answers....and, apparently, in their world the other party will never have control and erase your "perfect" solution.
I think the core of the idea is "if we pass an entitlement, history shows it can't be taken away". Except you're forgetting that very filibuster has played a role in protecting those entitlements. Obamacare does not survive if the Repubs had nuked the filibuster. As Mitch McConnell famously told Harry Reid - "careful what you wish for".
posted by QuakerOatsYou mean the do-nothing congress full of radical resistors?
You kidding me? I'd vote 100% in favor of a "do-nothing [C]ongress." It's better than when they do something.
posted by O-TrapYou kidding me? I'd vote 100% in favor of a "do-nothing [C]ongress." It's better than when they do something.
Yes, I'm a big fan of The Gridlock
If they're not actively rolling back the State, give me a do-nothing Congress every single time.
posted by O-TrapYou kidding me? I'd vote 100% in favor of a "do-nothing [C]ongress." It's better than when they do something.
this
posted by gutPurely partisan legislation is rarely good. The instability it would bring would be bad for business/economy. Just imagine every time the Senate flips that guns become illegal or legal. Or that your healthcare gets fucked with.
It really is one of the most reckless ideas I've heard proposed in all the years I've been voting. This only comes from an idealogue who has deluded themself into thinking they have all the answers....and, apparently, in their world the other party will never have control and erase your "perfect" solution.
I think the core of the idea is "if we pass an entitlement, history shows it can't be taken away". Except you're forgetting that very filibuster has played a role in protecting those entitlements. Obamacare does not survive if the Repubs had nuked the filibuster. As Mitch McConnell famously told Harry Reid - "careful what you wish for".
Completely agree.
Truthfully, I just HAVE to believe that they don't actually want this and know it's a bad idea. Generally speaking, I tend to trust a given person to know more about their profession than someone who isn't in that space, and I have to believe that the average career politician (read: Biden, Warren, Sanders) knows that nixing the filibuster would be a terrible idea.
I had the same thought when Democrats were defending Obama's liberal (the non-political use of that term) use of the EO. Do you honestly think there's never going to be anyone in that position who you'd rather NOT have that ability?
posted by justincredibleIf they're not actively rolling back the State, give me a do-nothing Congress every single time.
Aye.
And let's be honest: They're never actively rolling back the state.
posted by O-TrapAye.
And let's be honest: They're never actively rolling back the state.
posted by O-Trap... and I have to believe that the average career politician (read: Biden, Warren, Sanders) knows that nixing the filibuster would be a terrible idea.
I would like to agree, but Harry Reid did exactly that with judicial nominations. Then Mitch McConnell one-upped him to eliminate it for SCOTUS nominations, which allowed the Repubs to steal a SCOTUS seat.
So there's already precedent for what a disaster eliminating the filibuster would be. Not to mention, ACA was passed with the budget reconciliation trick, and by any objective measure that program is a mess and achieved very few of its goals.
I'll say again: Orange Man Bad, but Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are the ones who have done real damage to our democracy.
posted by O-TrapYou kidding me? I'd vote 100% in favor of a "do-nothing [C]ongress." It's better than when they do something.
Not arguing that; just pointing out to Ptown that a few positive things could have been achieved had the resistors not taken over the democrat party --- such as IMMIGRATION REFORM, for starters.
posted by QuakerOats
Not arguing that; just pointing out to Ptown that a few positive things could have been achieved had the resistors not taken over the democrat party --- such as IMMIGRATION REFORM, for starters.
Meh. It's not like the kind of immigration reform that you'd like to see would have been the result. It either would have resulted in increased spending (more taxes and bigger government) or a more relaxed immigration policy (which you seem to oppose). Hell, it's Congress we're talking about. They'd likely find a way to make the policy less strict AND more expensive.
posted by O-TrapYou kidding me? I'd vote 100% in favor of a "do-nothing [C]ongress." It's better than when they do something.
So I am not the only one that most POTUS elections votes one way for POTUS and the opposite party for the HoR and Senate hoping for gridlock?
