politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Already forgotten about the infrastructure bill? That also includes a lot of climate action.
I agree the infrastructure bill is a step in the right direction, but its mostly just clearing the maintenance backlog. Our infrastructure will be upgraded from "crumbling" to "poor". Its easy to forget it, most Americans already have.
Now instead of being 20 years behind China, our infrastructure will only be 15 years behind. As the richest country in the history of earth, we can do so much better than this.
And as for climate, tinkering around the edges isn't meaningful. We are still going full speed ahead towards climate ccatastrophe. We need radical change to save our civilization, and this bill ain't it, jack.
This always pisses me off. Look how far we've gotten with such piss poor leadership for so long. Imagine what the nation could look like if we had even just mostly competent leadership for the last 50 years.
I dont agree that it's a competency issue.
Our leaders are hyper-competent when fighting for the interests of wall street, the military industrial complex, the oil and gas industry, the insurance industry, etc.
Powerful moneyed interests are their real constituents. They only pretend to care about the needs of real working Americans when they need votes.
And Trump is going to do better on any of that? No way in hell.
Might as well complain that Biden didn't cure cancer and buy everyone a puppy.
Asking for a democratically elected leader to respond to the needs of the people isn't "curing cancer and buying puppies"
And yes Biden is better than Trump, but is that really how low you want to set the bar?
Have some standards, mate.
I think the bar is already set that low because you wouldn't need to choose between two geriatrics if the bar was higher. America could do better, but America won't do better
Expecting a president to make massive social changes when the House is led by a dysfunctional opposition party is asking for a cure to cancer and buying puppies. It's just not going to happen.
The candidates are Trump and Biden. That's who we've got to pick from. Anyone else who thinks they have a chance is delusional. That's the system. We can wish all we want it wasn't so, but it is.
The only way things begin to change is if the GOP loses control of the House, we get rid of the electoral college, and we get ranked choice voting. The only way that happens is through Democrats.
I dont expect Biden to get anything through the Republican house. I dont expect miracles. It's too late now.
I expected him to do something when Democrats had control of Congress. Instead he choose to follow Obama's failures and do practically nothing when the people gave Democrats control of the House, Senate, and White House.
And if you think Democrats will actually give up their role as Lesser Evil and pass ranked choice voting, then I think you are delusional.
You mean, when they had slim majorities and two quislings among the Democrats in the Senate who refused to vote for filibuster reform? That control?
Please join us in reality. We'd love to have your help.
Maybe if the Democrats gave even a tiny amount of pushback against those "quislings" then they would deserve some credit.
After all the damage Manchin has done, they still let him chair the energy committee and sit on appropriations. I'm here in reality wondering why they continue to give quislings so much power. Its almost as if the "rotating villain" is a feature, not a bug.
"We tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" isn't good enough for me, and it's sad that so many people just accept it.
Have some standards, mate.
Like this?
The problem was that both Manchin and Sinema understood that they had leverage to decide what policies lived or died. And as often as not, they torpedoed progressive legislation because they both consider themselves "moderate." They didn't stand in the way only when it didn't interfere with their personal enrichment. And since Senate Democrats have no control over the elections that put them in that position, it's extremely dishonest to blame Democrats for it.
Now that Manchin is retiring, Democrats are shitting their pants over their chances to hold the Senate in 2024. They know they won't be able to get a progressive to replace Manchin.
No, a few words to the media is not meaningful pushback.
Why do you avoid my main argument? Manchin is head of the energy committee. Why do Democrats keep giving so much power to a quisling, even after they were betrayed by him?
How do you punish him when he can simply start caucusing with Republicans and end the Democrats' slim majority? In order to pressure him you have to have leverage, and for the past few years he's had more of it than Senate Democrats.
I'll say it another time:
You pressure manchin by stripping him of his committee assignments. This is huge leverage.
The chair of the energy committee is a very important and powerful position, and even after Manchin betrayed Bidens supposed agenda, the Democrats still give him this immense power. Why?
Hes already blocking all meaningful legislation, if he wants to give up his power and go caucus with republicans then let him. Call his bluff. If he would actually switch to (R) he would become just another run of the mill Republican. His donors would dry up, he wouldn't get headlines, he wouldnt matter anymore.
And there's still more damage he can do by defecting. Just look at what they're anticipating with his retirement. He still holds more leverage than Senate Democrats. I don't you know why you think they hold more power with such a slim majority that depends entirely on his cooperation.
Holding the majority is meaningless if you can't use it
Again, incorrect. The majority gets to determine nominations, set agendas, determine which bills come up for a vote, and so forth.