His excuse is bogus, but a least he's finally admitted his posts are shit.You aren't on here 24x7?
Which party wants to actually compromise?
- Thread starter cosmickid
- Start date
Apparently their own since they couldn't confirm during an election year....oh wait we can confirm during an election year. Oopsy, we didn't mean to change our tune
So you are not going to tell me how they cheated. And you did not post any laws that were broken. Did the Senate change the rules?
They changed the rules as they described them the first time.
If the dems did that bullshit then you would be singing a different too.
Rules? They actually changed the Senate rules? Like the way Reid did?
I must have missed that.
It is the reason they stated that they couldnt confirm garland. The fact that they had no issue confirming one in 2020 shows they were full of shit.
I was a pretty good sweeper back in the day. Don’t knows if soccer teams still have that position. But as a last line of defense, I’m the one you want.
No rules were changed. No point of order was brought up (like Reid did). The committee simply let the nomination expire, which is within the rules of the Senate.
And yes, if the roles were reversed, I would be pissed. Just like if the roles were reversed, you would be happy and would point to the majority leader invoking the nuclear option on federal appointees, which is exactly what Reid did.
So when cosmic says he gave up on compromise with the "stolen" justices, I say blame Reid.
And as I said, NEITHER party wants to compromise. I know my party does not. But the Dems don't either. I've got beachfront property in Kansas if you believe they will compromise.
So because you assume the other side would do the same, it makes that bull shit alright.
Yea ok. Nice logic
Wait! Wait! Wait! You just posted that if roles were reversed, R’s would be mad at D’s for the move. And I agreed. But when I say if roles were reversed, and D’s did the same to the R’s, the D’s would be happy (like the R’s are now), you question whether the D’s would actually do it, as if they are morally superior? Ha! Ha! Ha! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Dude, get off the teet of the Dem party and realized they both just want power and will screw each other any day, any time. Obamacare…we’ll read it after it’s passed. Infrastructure now…pass more spending in a reconciliation bill. Shit happens both ways. Reid just opened the nuclear option can of worms and Mitch f’d the Dems because of it. Karma is a bitch….both ways.
That was an impressive display by the legislator. Made him look like a kid or he is just a kid.
The fact that not one Republican supported this because Schumer insisted on voting for a bill before there was any details is revealing. Democratic Congressional leadership has made it clear that their goal isn't to pass a bipartisan infrastructure bill.
The Senate is broken. It is no longer a functioning legislative body. This is the kind of shit people point to and yell "Blow the whole thing up!"
Gee. I swear someone on here posted that NEITHER party wants to compromise and both just want power. Just can't remember who posted it? Hmmmmmm?
They don’t have to. They seem to be taking charge of the democrat party.
That's a standard procedural move for the majority leader to keep the bill in his back pocket for later. McConnell did the same thing. And Reid before him. And so on and so forth.
Your non-partisan partisanship is seeping through. Schumer needed to break the deadlock and get the GOP to actually move on the bill. He took a gamble, tried to beat the GOP at their own game, and for once it actually worked.
The fact that Portman, Kennedy, and numerous other Pubs are now saying they will be back to vote on the bill on Mon reflects that he at least got them to set a deadline. Unless you believe that somehow the bill will from Wed to Mon suddenly contain all the details the GOP claimed they needed?
Also as this video points out, Schumer needed to see where the budget is, and whether the bi-par bill is going to fail and the Dems will need to fold it in as part of the reconciliation bill on human infrastructure like child care, medical assistance, family leave, etc...
I don't particularly like Anna-might be her rough Armenian exterior. But she does a good job here of pointing out how Dahen nails the reasons Schumer tried to force a vote on starting the debate process...
You just broke the first rule of whutaboutism- knowing the answer to the relevant questions. McConnell was elected to the Senate in 1985, Schumer in 1998. Schumer became Minority leader in 2017, McConnell was in the role of both Minority and Majority Leader as far back as the first decade of this Century...
In other words, all of the moves you're attacking Schumer for were first practiced by McConnell. It makes you look really stupid to try and claim otherwise...
Pointing out double standards doesn't count on this forum, remember?
If I point it out, it's "whutabout".
How does it feel to have that standard applied to you?
I'm all for Cortez campaigning against the infrastructure deal by accusing Democrat Senators of intentionally excluding minorities from the negotiations.
It's going to be hilarious when The Squad pisses of Sinema and Manchin so much with these dishonest attacks trying to kill the infrastructure bill that Democrats can't get the votes to pass anything substantive with reconciliation.
Also funny that they have become so used to this tactic that they are resorting to playing the race card against other Democrats because they just don't know how to argue substance anymore.
their substance is either insane or in bad faith so why would anyone include any members of the squad (progressives) if the objective is to reach a bargain. a collection of race-baiters living in fantasyland are inimical to deal-making
perhaps what we're seeing is what unclebulk intimated some time ago about just getting a group from each side that can work together and be productive and get stuff done
Similar threads
