If there's something that Democrats love more than losing, I'd love to hear about it. This debt limit deal is going to be very stupid and is a continuation of the Democrats being cowards and refusing to play the same game as Republicans. If Republicans are going to take the global economy hostage when they're out of power, Democrats should stop giving them the means to do it. They could've abolished the debt ceiling, increased it some insane amount, extended it for 50 years, or even just raised it in the lame duck last year, but they decided to give Republicans in the House their bomb back. Joe Biden should've declared the debt ceiling unconstitutional and forced someone to challenge him or minted the platinum coin. Giving in to these terrorists does nothing but destroy any gains Democrats have made.
US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
This. Democrats need and MUST learn how to play fecking dirty like Republicans do as well. If the GOP resorts to economic terrorism, I swear Democrats should start doing the same. Some states out there really deserve to have federal funding cut or being directly threatened of being done after Republican governors outright said they don't need federal money anymore. Words should be followed with consequences.
You don't appear to know how the US Congress works, firstly the President, at present Joe Biden, doesn't set the limits, the Constitution actually gives that power to Congress, as for the lame duck session, to pass such a bill requires a simple majority in the House and a 2/3 majority in the Senate, given the Senate was 50-50 there was precisely zero possibility that such a law could pass
Looks like there might be some agreement after all, one point of this deal though, reducing funding for IRS, makes no sense at all if Republicans claims this is about the deficit.
IRS always brings in more money than they get in funding, so they should be praising them, instead of villifying them.
Lets see though, no guarantee that the house passes this, McCarthy is a rather weak leader so he might not get everyone on board.
IRS always brings in more money than they get in funding, so they should be praising them, instead of villifying them.
Lets see though, no guarantee that the house passes this, McCarthy is a rather weak leader so he might not get everyone on board.
Just get rid of the debt ceiling. It's a dumb idea and nobody else does it.
Already enough MAGAites have come out as no votes that this will need Dem support to pass.
I do know how Congress works. There was a reconciliation bill in the lame duck that passed and could have increased the debt ceiling. It also doesn't require a 2/3 majority for a non-reconciliation debt ceiling increase. It would require 60 votes to break the filibuster, which, last I checked, is less than 2/3 of 100. Additionally, Democrats could have eliminated the filibuster for debt ceiling increases if they weren't so dedicated to losing. The Senate Rules are whatever the majority of the Senate wants them to be, which means as long as they have 50 votes and the VP, they can do whatever the hell they want within very limited Constitutional restrictions. The only things that require a 2/3 majority in the Senate are expelling a Senator, treaties, impeachment convictions, constitutional amendments, and veto overrides.There's also a very strong case for the debt ceiling being unconstitutional since it conflicts with the 14th Amendment, which states that all US debts shall not be questioned. Unfortunately, Joe Biden and his Treasury are too cowardly to pursue that action for the sake of "norms." That leaves Minting the Coin, which would be the Treasury minting trillion dollar platinum coins, which is allowed by statute and would effectively nullify the debt ceiling, even if the administration didn't want to pursue the 14th Amendment strategy.
Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, and others would rather protect the norms of the Senate than actually accomplish anything with a Democratic trifecta. It's why Dick Durbin allows Republicans to block Joe Biden's judicial nominees by honoring their blue slips, which will ensure that Republicans have plenty of seats to stack with more insane rightwing judges the next time there's a Republican president. That's why the 5th Circuit and 11th Circuit are packed with insane judges who keep producing absurd rulings.
Last edited:
If deal passes the house, i imagine there will soon be a revolt against McCarthy as speaker.
He was never on solid ground in the first place, and with new rules for house speakership, vote to remove him might happen sooner than you know.
Wonder if dems have offered him assurances if he gets a deal through, a couple of dem votes to keep him in speakership?
He was never on solid ground in the first place, and with new rules for house speakership, vote to remove him might happen sooner than you know.
Wonder if dems have offered him assurances if he gets a deal through, a couple of dem votes to keep him in speakership?
The next GOP speaker will be a lot more mental and less reasonable than McCarthy - this is a pretty reasonable deal.
No deal is “reasonable”, it is just lest horrific than it could be.
Problem is as part of the deal that made him Speaker is that it only takes 1 to call for his removal and there has to be a vote, if the hardliners aren't happy then it's going to be a fiasco
They will nominate who? and that guy won't have the vote either. They are just barking loudly. I don't think much is going to happen to him because it would be like shooting their own foot going forward for a lot of reasons.
Well, if it does, that would be entertaining.
Yes, only takes one to get a new vote, a deal he had to take in order to become speaker, at what, 15th vote?
I'd be surprised if one of the usual suspects didn't call for a new vote, actually, if this deals gets through.
You think the likes of Greene, Gosar, Boubert and so on, have the capability of thinking strategically?
Cause i'm not sure that they do.
The hardline eejits don't care, they just want chaos and anarchy, looked how they ignored their master last time
My bad on the 2/3rds, I knew that!
There's also a very strong case for the debt ceiling being unconstitutional since it conflicts with the 14th Amendment, which states that all US debts shall not be questioned. Unfortunately, Joe Biden and his Treasury are too cowardly to pursue that action for the sake of "norms." That leaves Minting the Coin, which would be the Treasury minting trillion dollar platinum coins, which is allowed by statute and would effectively nullify the debt ceiling, even if the administration didn't want to pursue the 14th Amendment strategy.
Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, and others would rather protect the norms of the Senate than actually accomplish anything with a Democratic trifecta. It's why Dick Durbin allows Republicans to block Joe Biden's judicial nominees by honoring their blue slips, which will ensure that Republicans have plenty of seats to stack with more insane rightwing judges the next time there's a Republican president. That's why the 5th Circuit and 11th Circuit are packed with insane judges who keep producing absurd rulings.
Re: 14th - that maybe the case but with the current SC you never know and by the time it was sorted out it would be too late
Dems do need to rethink how they do some things but you just know they don't have the stomach for going down to the levels that the GOP are prepared to
I'll be surprised as well, not sure how the rules work going forward, can the rules that were set at the start of this Congress be changed or do the apply for the whole session? If the latter then McCarthy is probably toast soon
The only dumb part is that it can he changed all the time. It should not be allowed to increase it unless in very extreme cases (war etc).
It is something that will bite big time. Pretty much there is a consensus of economists that borrowing on this degree is a very bad idea.
Not that either party care, of course. Democrats don’t care at all, while GOP pretend to care when Democrats are in power (but when GOP is in power, they borrow even more). It is gonna end with a total disaster.
Maybe, but literally no other country in the world has a debt ceiling like that. Denmark has one, but the ceiling is so high that it will never be reached. Making it even stricter is probably not the way to fix it.
Not many countries borrow as much as the US though. The list is pretty short: Venezuela, Eritrea, Greece, Italy, Japan and Singapore. The first two are failed states, Greece is probably the poorest country in the EU, Italy’s and Japan’s economy has not been great recently.
What's the solution though? I'm no economist, but wouldn't it be apocalyptically bad for the US if they freeze the debt ceiling and run into it?
In general: Raise taxes, lower the expenses. Like pretty much everyone else does.
It would be apocalyptic if the US defaults. But eventually it will either default or get a heavy (like in seventies/eighties) inflation, it is not sustainable increasing the debt forever (as ratio of GDP).
It requires parties to work together and there's a better chance of me playing CF for Man United than that happening
It was doable until Dubya. The party in power set the agenda, and they found some way of collaborating, with the budget being relatively balanced.
Then Dubya increased spending while lowering taxes, Obama increased spending even more without increasing taxes, Trump increased spending and lowered taxes, and now Biden continuing increasing spending without trying to balance the budget. It is a recipe for disaster, a ticking bomb if it ever was one.
This part is a bit misleading as the GOP (and some in his own party) are actively trying to shrink incoming revenue (IRS cuts, Sinema's private equity bull shit, refusal to undo Trump's tax cuts....let alone raise taxes, etc.). The US budget should not be difficult to balance, but at the same time it is impossible as things stand now. Dem's are so terrified of being tied to the phrase "raise taxes", even if it applies to 0.1% of the population, that they will instead send us deeper into unnecessary debt. The debt limit should be nuked and axes should be raised. The budget would be back in the surplus in a few years.
What is misleading? If Dems wanted to balance the budget they could have by raising taxes when they controlled The House. They did not raise taxes, the extended expanses.
I do not see how the budget will be back in surplus when both parties are happy to spend like drunken sailors (Dems even more so) with GOP also lowering taxes (which means lower budget).
Since Obama became president, the debt has increased from around 70% to 120%, and is continuing to increase even more. I do not see how could anyone with a bit of rationality, Democrat or Republican, thinks that doing so is a great idea.
Yes the Dems could have raised taxes and balanced the budget, the result would have been a Republican house and senate, the latter would probably be filibuster proof as well
So basically democrats act like republicans to avoid republicans to be in power. Smart
No, politicians behaving like politicians, but let's face it, there are far more headcases on the right than there is on the left, can you imagine what Trump or DeSantis would be like with a filibuster proof senate and control of the house?
Well, the situation is this. Trump and Co do what they want because they are not afraid. Democrats win and they don't touch much of the statuts quote because they are afraid. But anyway the R come back to public because is sort of cyclical. R destroys anything that Ds did like Obama care and double down. Ds comes back because you know...cyclical. They barley undo what R do and so on.
What you have? R destroying any progression in Helathcare, Gunns over the roof, Banning books and lower tax to the rich. What meaningful impact the Ds have? nothing. Is a republican country where republicans act as such and D act like R to be afraid to be kicked out but they are kicked out anyway. Unless they are ok acting like R because they are the same shit
You do realize that Obamacare is still the law of the land, all that was really changed were the tax penalties
Democrats are very wary of changing the rules to get what they want done, the last time they did it ultimately led to the current RW Supreme Court, that decision is essentially the reason why any gun control measures are DOA and abortion access is basically available only in Dem run states, they were warned at the time that they would regret it and they sure do now.
Obamacare exists but had been attacked and crippled left and right. Then guns might be as difficult as you want but there are options at least to mitigate what is going on and they do nothing. I am sorry but not, Ds are scared of doing anything meaningful while Rs are as vocal as to be nutcases
Sorry you have no idea what you're talking about, Obamacare is more popular that it's ever been, as for guns, what options are there to mitigate things?
The SC have overturned a measure in NY that had been in place for a 100 years, any legislation that doesn't fit with the laws of the 1780's is fair game to be thrown out, current restrictions in CA (I think) that bans 18-21's from owning a handgun is being challenged and the challenger will almost certainly win
Sorry that I don't know what I am talking about but I will still go at it
Trump campaigned on defund Obamacare without fear of consequences, pro guns, pro tax slashes, etc... and no consequences. Biden didn't even touch subjects. Obamacare was defunded and tried to be repealed left and right. Now, states they see how dumb it would be and some (only some) they are starting to work with it but they started to stop to repeal it till 2022 but reality was stronger. 7 years later
And guess what it might be affected with the debt ceiling deal what it is being jeopardized
What consequences should there be for campaigning on issues that you don't agree with? And in Trump's case ones I don't agree with either
Obamacare hasn't been defunded, it's popularity is at an all time high and Trump lost the election, I'd say that's pretty consequential
President's don't have carte blanche to do what they want, Congress holds the power of the purse, Congress writes the laws, they also have the power to override Presidential veto's nor, do they have power over State measures, the Sta,tes that voted to NOT expand Medicaid are all Republican run ones, if the people in those States disagree they can vote them out, in fact some States actually asked their population to vote on it
Ok, lets rewind on what I am trying to point out. You can campaign on policies, and routes to reach these policies and put a debate on how we could make them work out.
In my opinion, R says that they would do this and that and more, theuy might not be doing it or flat out lies like lowering taxes saying that it would benefit everyone but only the rich. You might not want to repeal ACA and might not do much to do it, you might to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it knowing is BS. Basically R they don't care to go to the mud and go dirty
Then on the guns, R double down, D do nothing. You say because is unconstitutional but there is simply no debate, a serious debate how to tackle this obvious issue. They are scared
Same with taxes, before the midterms they had the opportunity to undo the tax cuts that R placed with Trump. Instead here you are with debt ceiling again instead of balance the budget via taxes
And many other topics
My point, without entering in policy specifics, is that Rs don't mind to get dirty and push through, being true, being a flat lie or wishy washy. They are not afraid if they might lose and push as much as realistically they can, their policies. Ds might propose things, might work but there always that sentence on the big topics " if they don't do that (acting like and R or not undoing R BS), the republicans will go in power" so IMO means that Rs are the winners. because in government or you have R or R lite (D)
You can debate as much as you want, the reality is that to pass most laws you require 60 votes in the Senate, that's nigh on impossible to get in the current climate no matter which party is in power
You say they had the opportunity to undo tax cuts, in theory yes, in practice they know perfectly well if they did that they'd lose more than a few house seats and more than a few Senate seats, Trump's tax cuts went to everyone, the rich just got a better deal with the corporate stuff, and those tax cuts for the average Joe, expire in 2025, even if those were repealed they wouldn't have even dented the debt ceiling
You can also, discuss, debate, create new laws until the cows come home, if they don't fall under what the SC deems to be compatible with the existing laws at the time the Constitution was written they are illegal and will be canned, it's nuts but that's the reality
At the end of the day America is a deeply divided country stuck on the notion that a 200 year old piece of paper defines what it should be, it's almost impossible to change, changing anything in the Constitution requires a 2/3 majority in the House and the Senate and then 3/4 of the State legislatures, it's just not happening
Yes, I agree on the picture that you paint on US current political climate. It is practically impossible to have any meaningful change. But it seems to me that if something is changing is towards the R arrow of the scale while D don't even want to go to a real debate, just being afraid. Even if it doesn't pass, first it needs to have a real debate to reach, some day, the possibility of a meaningful change
This whole mess does not make me regret living in a country with a Westminster type of parliament one bit.
In countries like Canada/Australia/UK/Japan, the Minister of Finances has one full year to see what cities, counties and provinces/states need and then come up with a proper budget. All of that while there is feck all debt ceiling. If the budget is not satisfactory enough to get votes inside parliament, we go into an election while the system keeps on paying government employees.
In countries like Canada/Australia/UK/Japan, the Minister of Finances has one full year to see what cities, counties and provinces/states need and then come up with a proper budget. All of that while there is feck all debt ceiling. If the budget is not satisfactory enough to get votes inside parliament, we go into an election while the system keeps on paying government employees.
Bunch of house republicans are NOT happy with this deal, McCarthy is in big trouble i'd say.
Could be many republicans against this deal, actually, and expect a bunch of the progressive caucus to be against as well.
We will see if this has the votes soon.
Could be many republicans against this deal, actually, and expect a bunch of the progressive caucus to be against as well.
We will see if this has the votes soon.
Last edited: