This post may contain Adult content.
Politics
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join Similar Worlds today »

Should Biden let the Republicans have Manchin?

Steve Bannon is pushing to "bring Joe Manchin into the Republican Party." Joe already votes Republican Party Line and could be the biggest factor in bringing down democracy as we know it so what difference does it make if he has the R in front of his name.
Moscow Mitch is going to let Biden gut his own infrastructure bill and when it finally comes up for a vote he'll use the filibuster to say FuckYou we block all Democrat Bills. Then he can thank Manchin again.
Oldest First | Newest First | Top
Well a double agent can only reveal himself once. So Manchin is of no use as a Democrat anymore.
[@406636,causernamebemyusername] And has no power to negotiate with Republicans because he's already said he will vote as a Republican.
LvChris · 41-45, M
I hope the Ds run ads in his state saying objectively true things: You could have higher wages, but Manchin voted no. You could have better roads, schools, bridges, but Manchin voted no. Etc.
[@335805,LvChris] Then the Republicans will run ads saying Biden can't control his own people.
MarkPaul · 22-25, M
Manchin doesn't vote the Republican Party line and is a true Democrat. In these times of teams, tribes, and sides, it's hard for independent thinkers to be liked. But, maybe being liked isn't really worth all that much.
[@31716,beckyromero] The parameters of voting for statehood are determined by the prospective state's legislature, not Congress, which is where the up-or-down state vote happens. There's nothing in the Constitution prohibiting the vote in PR to be a choice of either statehood, independence, or remain a territory.

If your argument is that PR "should" hold a yes-or-no vote on statehood, I would agree, as people would be less likely to boycott it.

And Lila is correct, while Republicans expect PR to add two Democratic senators, there's no guarantee. The current governor of PR is Pedro Pierluisi Urrutia, who, like his predecessor Wanda Vázquez Garced, is a member of the New Progressive Party which advocates statehood. However, Pierluisi also identifies as a Democrat, while Vázquez has identified as a Republican since 2019. On the whole, Puerto Ricans are certainly more aligned with the Democratic Party than Cubans, but not as much as Americans of Mexican and Central American background are.
beckyromero · 31-35, F
[@1026,LeopoldBloom] [quote] The parameters of voting for statehood are determined by the prospective state's legislature, not Congress, which is where the up-or-down state vote happens. There's nothing in the Constitution prohibiting the vote in PR to be a choice of either statehood, independence, or remain a territory.[/quote]

What has happened in the past is confusing ballot choices, giving Congress an excuse to ignore the vote, such as what happened in 2012. And this is because Congress can set the parameters of what it will accept. If there was a majority support in Congress for statehood, it would happen because it would be a simple yes or no on the question of statehood. And Congress could adopt legislation that says it would accept the results of that question.

Ever since 1789, the standard practice was to put U.S. territories on the path to statehood. But has been ignored in Puerto Rico's case.

[quote]And Lila is correct, while Republicans expect PR to add two Democratic senators, there's no guarantee.[/quote]

Perhaps if a Republican President was named Jeb Bush then I'd agree.

Otherwise, this is what voters would be reminded of on down ticket races:

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEe7_zgZbuI]
[@31716,beckyromero] The only reason DC and PR aren't up for statehood is because Republicans in the Senate are opposed to it, and Joe Manchin isn't ready to ditch the filibuster yet. Four more Democratic Senators would limit Manchin's power, but on the other hand, he could vote with the Republicans whenever he felt like it and no one would care.
Viper · 31-35, M
Remember whomever controls the Senate controls what comes up tot vote and what doesn't, that's extremely powerful.

Even if the person votes for the other side 100% of the time, you want them under your label to give you control of the Senate that's 50-50 right now, to let you pick what gets voted on and what doesn't.
[@800884,Viper] Manchin is giving Mitch that choice. Mitch has hundreds of Democrat Bills he has never brought into the Senate to be voted on. Machin knows this. Machin guarantees those bills never come onto the floor.
Burnley123 · 36-40, M
If one side plays bi partisan peacemaker and the other plays scorched earth belligerence, then there is only one way it ends.

This virtue in compromise for compromise sake is naive and cynical. Its an abdication of responsibility and will cost people's lives
JoeyFoxx · 51-55, M
[@422868,Burnley123] who cares about people’s lives so long as the ones that survive keep their outsized share of the pie?
tindrummer · M
Manchin may be laying the groundwork for actually limiting the filibuster after doing all he can to encourage bipartisanship.
He'll be able to present that (not having a choice) to his constituents.
[@400948,tindrummer] Limit the filibuster? Right now he's letting Rich Mitch stop all Democrat Bills [b]with[/b] the filibuster. Jan 6th investigation, infrastructure bill, creating millions of jobs, equal rights voting bill. Manchin doesn't seem to want any of it. Mitch knows if Biden starts flooding States with infrastructure jobs the Republicans are done in 22. Same with any bill that cracks down on suppression or gerrymandering.
tindrummer · M
[@619287,Jwalker] I know all that but my theory isn't unthinkable; just not as likely as I'd like.
The political advocacy group backed by billionaire Charles Koch has been pressuring Sen. Joe Manchin, to oppose key parts of the Democratic agenda, including filibuster reform and voting rights legislation. Americans for Prosperity launched a website titled West Virginia Values, which calls on people to email Manchin “to be The Voice West Virginia Needs In D.C. Reject Washington’s Partisan Agenda.” It then lists all of the items Manchin has promised to oppose, including the idea of eliminating the filibuster, the For the People Act and packing the Supreme Court. It then shows everything the group believes Manchin should oppose, including Biden’s infrastructure plan and the union-friendly PRO Act.
JoeyFoxx · 51-55, M
It’s far better to never raise taxes on the rich than to have bridges that won’t collapse.
[@802348,JoeyFoxx] Because the rich have access to helicopters???
JoeyFoxx · 51-55, M
[@619287,Jwalker] because the rich have better attorneys

 
Post Comment  
 
10144 people following
Politics
Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
New Post
Group Members