Jesus Christ, talk about being tone deaf. Lloyd comes off as a fecking moron, makes you question how the fck he ran Goldman for so long.
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Jesus Christ, talk about being tone deaf. Lloyd comes off as a fecking moron, makes you question how the fck he ran Goldman for so long.
It's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Authorities in New York are targets of criticism for preventing war-zone conditions in certain districts, while authorities in Chicago are condemned for allowing it.
So if Bernie did end up becoming POTUS what can he effectively achieve with Mitch blocking his every move in the Senate? Can he make major changes to the Judiciary and the Executive...firing all Trump appointees in Justice for example. Presumably he can repair Dept. of State too with only Senate confirmation stopping him in any contentious top appointments.
If you had a Deductible that you did not have to use, I can see why it may be cheaper.
The thing is we should not have to worry about Health Care.
Implementation?
With the energy we are seeing, people surrendering their will to him, I believe voters will bring in big majorities in Congress.
Unlike Trump though Sanders will be openly fighting for polices he ran on.
He will get a lot done.
Not if Moscow Mitch retains the Senate. The same can be said for any other Democratic candidate to be fair though.
Realistically, the best case scenario would probably be an incremental strengthening of the ACA. Anything more would get shot down by GOP and some Dem dissent.
I think he'd be better off waiting till a second term to do that when numbers in the House might be better. He would just cause a massive shitstorm if he tried it now.
Absolutely, and even that needs for Dems to gain the senate, which I don't see it happening until 2022 (which might well be when they lose the House, considering that House often goes to the opposition party).
I don't think that Bernie's plan has any chance getting implemented during his presidency, though strengthening ACA would be a right step and hopefully in long term might converge to a Medicare for all-like solution.
Both Trump and Obama lost the House 2 years into their presidency. It is quite unlikely that Dems will have the House in 2024 (even in 2022 I would put GOP as favorites to get it), and if Bernie doesn't implement his policies, it is hard to see him winning again.
Gonna be tough no matter what.
That's the problem, though the same was said about Trump (dissent from Republicans) and he's managed to corral the party around himself and kicked out anyone who shows the slightest sign of dissent.
What do you mean? Justices (both in supreme court and federal level) are elected for life.
It has been mentioned the possibility of increasing the number of justices in Supreme Court, but I don't see that getting any popularity between Democrats, and will be fought from Republicans.
The best bet would be to replace RBG and Breyer, ensuring 4 left-wing justices, and then hope that one of GOP justices will retire (only Clarence Thomas is over 70). The biggest problem is if Trump wins again, then there is an extremely likely possibility of having a 6-3 court, and a quite likely possibility of a 7-2 court (Breyer will be 86 at the end of Trump's second term, while Ginsburg over 90 and she has been having serious health problems for a long time). Add to that, already more than 1/4 of judges at the federal level are Trump nominees, so this number will further increase, and by the end of Trump's second term, the entire justice department would be very one-sided. This is why Dems should vote any Dem nominee, otherwise, for quite many things is game over for decades.
How did Women’s Suffrage, Labor Rights, and Civil Rights become enacted?
He should concentrate on reversing the disenfranchisement efforts of the repubs to make a dem house majority more likely. Reverse the attacks on the judiciary, make incremental tax break policy for the people and look to making big healthcare changes in the second term when he has numbers and goodwill.
With a wave election, the Senate will be taken by the Democrats as happened in 2008.
Well from what I recall with civil rights, LBJ had the house behind him. He cut loose the south for the greater good but being as he was a master of the Congress having been one of the most effective leaders there, getting the legislation passed wasn't as major a hurdle as healthcare would be today.
Educate me on Suffrage.
Precisely.
Once nominated, he will take control of the party.
Once President, he will have even more power.
That assumes him having a second term, and having a unified Dem government during it. When is the last time this has happened? I might be wrong, but Truman was the last president whose party controlled both the senate and the house during the second term of the presidency. So the chances for a unified Dem government during a hypothetical second Sanders' term are extremely low. And Bernie's plan won't happen with GOP controlling one chamber.
The best bet would be for Dems to win the Senate this year (or in two years, while keeping the House). I think both cases are unlikely, but still, there is some chance that it might happen. Dems controlling everything in 2024 or 2026 is just something that won't happen if we look at the history of US politics since WW2.
I was rrying to demonstrate how mobilization, protests, demonstrations, etc by people have a huge effect in outcome. Without him directly saying it, Bernie has been alluding to this the whole time. Just expecting him as President to do it all by himself was never the option. Even with Civil Rights did all the protests put a lot of pressure on the LBJ administration.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...ould-move-to-rotate-supreme-court-justices-if
Bernie Sanders says he would move to 'rotate' Supreme Court justices if elected
Bernie Sanders says he would move to 'rotate' Supreme Court justices if elected
We need to stop viewing through the lens of latter 20th century politics. Trump’s election signaled the game being changed and just relying on the government to agree to solve problems is no longer the way to go. People are going to have to get out of the comfort zones to start making democracy work for them again. People invested into Bernie’s message mostly realize this already. It’s already occurred in our brief history. It can and will happen again if it means anything.
Probably we should not. It is a much better indicator, then 'my favorite candidate is more awesome than yours and he would do everything he says just because'.
Like 'rotating the court' for example. An unconstitutional act which will be easily defied in the supreme-court (why would they be voting against themselves), and in order to make it constitutional, you need 38 states to sign it. Someone tell me how many of these states are controlled by GOP. (26 if you are wondering).
As someone said, more chance of me banging Scarlett Johansson.
There were an equal number of protests against Civil Rights. LBJ doesn't get the credit he deserves in that he was actually a believer in equal rights and fairness. If you read about his upbringing and his views you will see that he was a decent man who played the pragmatic politician to get what he felt was important done as a Congressman, Senator, VP and POTUS.
This doesn't discount the terrible concessions he made to the armed forces to give them their war and to the FBI to give them domestic supremacy over crime prevention. But politics is a dirty business and he knew how to play it perfectly.
If you're a hopeless nerd like me read his bio by Robert Caro
Maybe it's because I'm a biased Norwegian, but having government and parliament divorced from each other seems like a great way to get nothing done. It's a very conservative way to govern a country, that's for sure.
I read a bio of him years ago. May have been that one. I like LBJ but he gets a lot of hate because of Vietnam...which is understandable, of course.
Pretty sure Liz drops out after Super Tuesday - she’s nearly out of money.
Not a bad thing. As has been said, she's more useful in the Senate. I don't think Americans want her preaching at them.
We'll have to disagree on that.
The right thing to do would be dropping out ASAP, so Bernie gets most of her votes. She is my favorite candidate, but it seems that she doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination,
I wouldn't fault her for sticking around til Super Tuesday. She's had a lot of people give her money and volunteer for her in many states. Once ST is done and dusted, I wouldn't expect her to stay in. Same with Pete, Steyer, and Klobuchar.
Absolutely.. do the right thing Liz,for the greater good
Yes, but if she doesn't have a chance of winning, better to help the candidate with the closest policies to her. Make a deal with Bernie so she gets in the ticket, and resign from the Senate in order to trigger the election.
Win-win for everyone (except her in case Trump wins, then she won't be a senator).
The replies
The replies
Idiots wasting their wealth like this deserve to have it taken away from them.
To be fair, I could definitely see Bloomberg winning AZ, being a native of AZ myself. Flipping AZ, MI, and PA is all that is needed for the Dem to win.
Very true but Sanders could win all 3 and then target Ohio and Florida.
I don't get this logic. There is nothing suggesting that she has a shot at the nomination. More importantly, she is polling at 2-3% with minorities heading into more diverse states. It serves no purpose for her to hang on till ST except to stroke the ego of her delusional fans who absurdly seem to think of her as the underdog in all of this.
The same could be said for many others like Pete, Klobuchar, Steyer, et al. Ultimately these people are in it to win and aren’t going to bow out because supporters of another candidate would like them to move out of the way out of convenience.
- Status