US Presidency

Rick said:Be interesting to see how this one shakes down. Not often you get Cruz, Trump Jr, and AOC all on the same side of an issue (condemning Robin Hood).

EDCLARKE said:
I suspect we agree on most things with regard to American politics , i think where we differ is in my view bad as Trump was i dont see Biden and Harris as any better , when judged by what they actually do . I am sure they will speak much more eloquently and be much more careful in what they say , but you can be sure they will look after their political donors an maintain the status quo over and above doing anything for the ordinary American people . As for the progressives in the democrat party i would say the public support for them is genuine but there is a clear example of the 20 or so progressive represesntatives in congress doing nothing when they had an opportunity to and that is when Pelosi came up for reelection as house speaker where she needed every vote to get it and there was an opportunity to gain concessions (such as a floor vote on healthcare) in exchange for their vote and they did absolutely nothing and voted for Pelosi on mass like good little soldiers.
I guess we will never agree on this , and will have to amicably disagree. lets see where things are in 4 years

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki ducks questions about what the Biden administration will do to 'protect the average American investor' amid GameStop controversy

Jeff Psaki, who previously worked under Felder at Magnetar, is expected to join later this year leading the credit component of the strategy, according to people familiar with the matter. Psaki most recently worked at Magnetar as a portfolio manager and head of credit, within the firm's fundamental strategies unit. He earlier worked at Goldman Sachs and Barclays.

Biden’s Buddy Tom Vilsack Is No Friend to Farmers
Confirming him as secretary of agriculture adds insult to the Democratic Party’s long record of malign neglect toward rural Americans.

Billwest said:
I know what you mean about the so-called progressives wimping out. In the votes on legislation what you say is true. They can withdraw their support and bill might fail. However, in the vote for Pelosi's re-election, they had no power. They had no choice, they are never gonna vote for a Republican speaker of the lower house. It's the logic of 2 party systems where representative numbers are very close (and the politics very conflicted). Most votes go on party lines because everyone has too much to lose by breaking ranks. This is also the reason I think the 2nd impeachment of Trump is a total waste of time. He will not be found guilty (though I would like to be wrong here), and the democrats would spend their time better trying to figure out how to sort out the country's other problems.

EDCLARKE said:
as i understand with the way the us system works for voting for the speaker because the democrats have control of the house had Pelosi not got the required votes it would have gone back to the democratic caucus for them to choose a new candidate , the only possible way of getting a republican speaker would be if multiple democrats voted for the republican candidate which no one was threatening to do , the story that withholding the vote for Pelosi would lead to a republican speaker was just bo***cks . there are numerous examples of
more right wing democrats withholding their votes for Pelosi unless they got positions on committees , and getting those positions in exchange for their votes , the progressives didnt get jack s**t and voted for Pelosi anyway. Aoc actually talks about withholding her vote to gain "progressive power" in her campaign material along with her position of getting a floor vote for medicare

Billwest said:
I think positions on committees is one thing, but changing democratic policy on something as major as medicare is a much bigger deal. (Clearly the progressives 20-odd votes does not give them the influence to change a major plank of Democratic policy). At the end of the day Democratic policy is made by Biden, not Pelosi, so changes like this are probably not within her 'gift' . There has clearly been some kind of agreement here behind the scenes, because it does seem strange otherwise

EDCLARKE said:
apparently AOC has refused to work with Cruz as she alleges he attempted to have her murdered during the capitol riot , i can't say i blame her for not wanting to work with Cruz as lets face it he's a massive c**t , but surely as a representative of the people your job is to work with people you don't like.

Rick said:
I'm ok with not being cooperative with people who literally tried to get you personally killed while encouraging a treasonous armed insurrection against democracy a less than a month ago; personally, I feel like that's reasonable.

EDCLARKE said: This is the crux of our disagreement i suspect either you are right and there is a backroom deal and we will see some gains for the progressives either in floor votes or in committee seats , or my theory is right that they are a smokescreen who say the right things but do nothing . Time will tell
either way i've enjoyed the debate.

WILLSAN said:
hyperbolic overload.
https://i.imgur.com/YJdNgFk.gif

Rick said:
I mean, you can argue about whether he was actually trying to get her killed. Maybe he's just very stupid. The rest? Many of them were armed. They invaded the seat of government, which makes it insurrection. They were trying to get the result of an election overturned, which makes it against democracy. And that's treason.