Manchin tells Dems to 'hit the pause button' on $3.5T spending plan

[Counselor706]

Sen. Joe Manchin told his fellow Democrats to pause the controversial and massive $3.5 trillion spending bill currently being debated in Congress.

"Hit the pause button," Manchin said Wednesday at an event hosted by the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce. "Let’s sit back. Let’s see what happens. We have so much on our plate. We really have an awful lot. I think that would be the prudent, wise thing to do."

Manchin represents the linchpin vote on the package which needs the support of every Democratic senator in order to move it through a divided Senate.

Source

 

[Sean Renaud]

At this point if the Dems don't kill the fillibuster it won't matter what we offer, we'll always be fucked.

 

[CornusKousa]

At this point if the Dems don't kill the fillibuster it won't matter what we offer, we'll always be fucked.

If you kill the filibuster, you're gonna miss it the second you're not the one holding the bully stick anymore.

That's only a little over a year away....making that move a terribly short sighted thing to do.

 

[ll74]

So I guess when Dems control Congress
...Trumpies have to bring up every single political posturing move that's made as if it means something....it's like trolling without any effort

 

[Sean Renaud]

If you kill the filibuster, you're gonna miss it the second you're not the one holding the bully stick anymore.

That's only a little over a year away....making that move a terribly short sighted thing to do.

Probably not actually. It was never meant to have happened, its just a typo in the law. If you want to get together with your colleages and keep talking until the otherside says "Fuck it, lets deal with something else that's find. But 41 people should not be able to tell 59 we simply aren't going to discuss this topic.

 

[icanhelp1]

At this point if the Dems don't kill the fillibuster it won't matter what we offer, we'll always be fucked.

Just the opposite, the filibuster rule gives an opportunity for cooler heads to prevail. The filibuster rule allows for the deliberative process to take hold and form a consensus and come to conclusions that benefit both parties for the sake of our country. Ending the filibuster rule will certainly spiral out of control leading to even more division and further retaliation in future congresses..


Pelosi pushing her agenda without a deliberative process or consensus because she holds the majority, as slim as it might be, is ruining the house.

 

[CornusKousa]

Probably not actually. It was never meant to have happened, its just a typo in the law. If you want to get together with your colleages and keep talking until the otherside says "Fuck it, lets deal with something else that's find. But 41 people should not be able to tell 59 we simply aren't going to discuss this topic.

I think simple majority democracy cuts 2 ways too easily.

I prefer that we push it 60/40....force some bipartisanship and or a larger majority to do something. Especially when "doing something" comes with so many unforeseen consequences.

Being a liberal, I like having all these stop gaps and gut checks on the ability for the majority to wield authority and power. I like my democracy in short, strong, chains.

 

[icanhelp1]

So I guess when Dems control Congress
...Trumpies have to bring up every single political posturing move that's made as if it means something....it's like trolling without any effort

Considering the Dems used the filibuster rule over a 160 times when the pubs held the majority in 2020.

 

[pecksniff]

If you kill the filibuster, you're gonna miss it the second you're not the one holding the bully stick anymore.

That's only a little over a year away....making that move a terribly short sighted thing to do.

I have always supported ending the filibuster no matter who controlled the Senate at the time.

And, no, the Senate is not going to go Pub in 2022.

 

[CornusKousa]

Considering the Dems used the filibuster rule over a 160 times when the pubs held the majority in 2020.

Yea..... Democrats would SERIOUSLY miss that check on democracy when they aren't the ones in the majority anymore.

Especially with the more feisty (R)'s coming into the party in the post Trump GOP.

If (D)'s can the filibuster, we just need a simple majority, and we can set the (D)'eez house of authority and control on fucking fire.

 

[pecksniff]

I like my democracy in short, strong, chains.

Funny you should put it that way.

 

[CornusKousa]

I have always supported ending the filibuster no matter who controlled the Senate at the time.

And, no, the Senate is not going to go Pub in 2022.

Maybe not, but probably.

As for the house? Every indicator out there says ya'll are losing it and just short of Biden and the (D)eez in congress doing some really uncontroversial and universally celebrated miracle shit??

Probably pretty badly.

 

[CornusKousa]

Funny you should put it that way.

Ohh a hysterical leftist control freak thinks liberalism is "radical right" and that decentralized democracy is a "stealth plan" !!!

Nancy should take a US History class....it's been the open plan for 245 years.

And everyone was on board until recently when (D)'s decided the USA was always meant to be a unitary state run by a simple majority democracy with unlimited power to abuse, persecute and crush anyone who doesn't toe the "progressive" line.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Just the opposite, the filibuster rule gives an opportunity for cooler heads to prevail. The filibuster rule allows for the deliberative process to take hold and form a consensus and come to conclusions that benefit both parties for the sake of our country. Ending the filibuster rule will certainly spiral out of control leading to even more division and further retaliation in future congresses..


Pelosi pushing her agenda without a deliberative process or consensus because she holds the majority, as slim as it might be, is ruining the house.

Except it doesn't let cooler heads prevail. It just means things can be tabled indefinitely by the minority party. The filibuster was never meant to happen. Its literally a typo from the sixties.

I think simple majority democracy cuts 2 ways too easily.

I prefer that we push it 60/40....force some bipartisanship and or a larger majority to do something. Especially when "doing something" comes with so many unforeseen consequences.

Being a liberal, I like having all these stop gaps and gut checks on the ability for the majority to wield authority and power. I like my democracy in short, strong, chains.

Just the way the man is drawn 60/40 is unrealistic and the Dems bend over backwards to give concessions but nothing is good enough. Please tell me about how the Dems twice under Trump flat out refused let a budget pass. Please tell me about how Dems were constantly down Trump's throat for his handling of the war. Which admittedly was a shit show since at least two years into Bush and nobody had the balls to do much. We knew at the end of the day it could have gone better than this, it could have gone worse but there were always going be dead people.

 

[pecksniff]

Ohh a hysterical leftist control freak thinks liberalism is "radical right" and that decentralized democracy is a "stealth plan" !!!

It's not about either of those, it's about rich economic libertarians like the Kochs surreptitiously meddling with the system to make it do things their way. And they have been astonishingly effectual. A book well worth reading.

 

[icanhelp1]

Except it doesn't let cooler heads prevail. It just means things can be tabled indefinitely by the minority party. The filibuster was never meant to happen. Its literally a typo from the sixties.



Just the way the man is drawn 60/40 is unrealistic and the Dems bend over backwards to give concessions but nothing is good enough. Please tell me about how the Dems twice under Trump flat out refused let a budget pass. Please tell me about how Dems were constantly down Trump's throat for his handling of the war. Which admittedly was a shit show since at least two years into Bush and nobody had the balls to do much. We knew at the end of the day it could have gone better than this, it could have gone worse but there were always going be dead people.

Ya can’t just play a game where the majority gets what they want all the time when they have the majority. Then we have run away legislation with no stops and everyone looses

 

[CornusKousa]

It's not about either of those, it's about rich economic libertarians like the Kochs surreptitiously meddling with the system to make it do things their way. And they have been astonishingly effectual. A book well worth reading.

Well that's what the synopsis and title say it's all about..... sounds like another generic leftist just figuring out the USA isn't a simple majority run, democratic socialist unitary state and trying to cash in on the outrage over all the liberalism (radical/extreemist/alt-REICH) and evil whiteness they must suffer.

I wouldn't be at all shocked if the book was written on a MacBook Pro, purchased from Amazon along with a *smash capitalism* sticker to go with it. LOL

If they're meddling with the system, they aren't libertarians.

People like the Koch's aren't even neo-liberals.....they're corporatist, a very different thing.

 

[pecksniff]

Ya can’t just play a game where the majority gets what they want all the time when they have the majority.

Subject to certain constitutional limitations, that is how it's supposed to work.

 

[pecksniff]

If they're meddling with the system, they aren't libertarians.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Ya can’t just play a game where the majority gets what they want all the time when they have the majority. Then we have run away legislation with no stops and everyone looses

Ignoring there is no logical reason to belieive that nonsense the bigger issue is that a minority shouldn't be allowed to refuse to negotiate. That doesn't mean they can't have some of what they want. Getting to 60/40 takes a unique amount of circumstances. We only got as close as we did (There were actually two independents that generally caucused with us) and people forget that Kennedy had the audacity to die like 7 months in. We gave and we gave and we gave, we didn't even START negotiations on Obamacare where we wanted and meet half way. We started with a slight adjustment to a Republican plan from the 90s and marched right from there.

Please explain how you can negotiate in good faith with a party that twice since 2008 have said "We are going to do our best to make sure you don't get anything done. Can you name the Democrats who stated they, or did actually refuse to do anything under Bush or Trump. Not I won't vote for this, but I'm just gonna take my ball and go home?

 

[KeithD]

Obviously the Republicans--and the board Trumpettes--are going to do whatever it takes to control from the minority. No honor whatsoever among Republicans and Trumpettes.

 

[ll74]

Considering the Dems used the filibuster rule over a 160 times when the pubs held the majority in 2020.

I'm talking about internal party posturing and Trumpies flipping out over every single time it happens, even though it is evidence of nothing.

Their use of the filibuster for Republican votes is not related

 

[Cubantripod]

At this point if the Dems don't kill the fillibuster it won't matter what we offer, we'll always be fucked.

You're not entitled to get your way. Trying finding common ground.

 

[Cubantripod]

I think simple majority democracy cuts 2 ways too easily.

I prefer that we push it 60/40....force some bipartisanship and or a larger majority to do something. Especially when "doing something" comes with so many unforeseen consequences.

Being a liberal, I like having all these stop gaps and gut checks on the ability for the majority to wield authority and power. I like my democracy in short, strong, chains.

That's the point of the filibuster. It makes it harder for a simple majority to run over the rest.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Senator Manchin likes the filibuster. Seems to feel pretty strongly about it. But hey, go ahead and kill it. It’s not like Joe has the option of changing parties and returning Mitch to the majority leader job in exchange for choice committee assignments.