- cross-posted to:
- nottheonion@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- nottheonion@lemmy.world
“I have spent my career inviting diversity of opinion. I think it’s important to have people at the table when some of the most important decisions are being made that have different views, different experiences,” Harris said. “And I think it would be to the benefit of the American public to have a member of my Cabinet who was a Republican.”
Oh dear gods… Please do not pull this “I’m going to work with the other side” nonsense. The republican party is morally bankrupt and it is no longer possible to reach across the aisle without pulling back a hand that’s missing a ring, watch, or maybe some fingers. Just stop with this centrist bullshit!
I’ll bet money it’s someone like Kinzinger.
Yep. He’s like the only good one lol
He’s still not “good”, he just cares that the actual country doesn’t go completely off the rails. Goodness is only relative to how bad the rest are, and apart from having the courage to leave the Republican party behind over Trump, he was still on board with a lot of their other bullshit and wasn’t pushed too far by any of their prior hate or shenanigans.
Give them the House of Reps, Senate, and presidency (all 3) for all 8 years. If they don’t have all 3 then they are literally forced to reach across the aisle.
deleted by creator
What the GOP wants to do is stop progress. They to got the big giant pause button on society. And they can do that with, drumroll please, any 1 of the 3.
They’re not writing new, complex legislation that then has to pass all 3 of house, Senate and presidency. Most of what they want to is stop new legislation.
deleted by creator
I said “Most of what they want to is stop new legislation.” Most.
What else? They want to pass tax breaks. That’s pretty easy. They get one house and they can demand tax breaks or they shut down the government. That’s what they did to Obama.
Or they try to repeal the ACA. They didn’t take months to think through and write out a well thought out replacement lol, all they want to do is repeal. They do need all 3 to do that, that’s why they thought they could, until McCain switched.
You missed one: The border wall. That’s when the GOP needed all 3 to pass it, so the Dems could block it.
Roe V wade? Yeah there’s a reason why they want to rule from the bench. So they can effectively repeal things without even having a single 1 of the 3. And so they can repeal without having to get all 3. Right? They want to rig it so they don’t need all 3 to effectively pass new anti-abortion laws.
Remember that’s what this was about: why the Dems need all 3 to do pretty much anything and why the GOP doesn’t. I think you lost sight of that. The whole court stacking shows exactly that. (PLUS, you don’t even need all 3 to stack the court. You can block new appointments with just the senate (that’s what they did to Obama), and you get new appointments with just the senate and presidency. Again, they can do more of what they want without all 3.)
deleted by creator
And what I’m saying is that it’s different for the GOP and the Dems. That’s the whole point:
For the Dems to do pretty much anything (not all, most), they need all 3. They need all 3 to actually pass anything.
For the GOP to do most (not all, most) of what they want to do, they only need 1. Most (not all, most) of what they want to do is block things.
This difference in what they need is the whole point.
Dude, I just explained this. If you’re going to ignore this conversation is not going to continue. So here it is: They (GOP) get one house and they can demand tax breaks or they shut down the government.
Ok? Need more? Dems by and large are not so eager to shut down the government. Nor to default, which is also what the GOP threatens to do. The GOP is wiling to burn down the country, they don’t care. The Dems obviously aren’t because they have a brain. Do you have any idea of what will happen if the government shuts down for long periods? Or if the govt defaults? It would be fucking bad. The GOP is willing and may even be happy to do that because they imo want to burn everything down anyway.
Yeah I’m covering the very few points where they need all 3. Most (not all) of what they want to do is block which only takes 1. In addition, I’m explaining that when the GOP has all 3 they can act quickly because they are not actually writing or constructing anything new. All they want to do is repeal. Ok?
… Ok you know this works both ways, right? Even when the Dems have all 3, people like Manchin or Sinema hold out and play games. Again, that’s why it’s harder for the Dems. And why we often get watered down stuff.
And you do realize that this “setup” means it’s harder for Dems right? Whenever they want to pass something new, they need to figure out EXACTLY how progressive each Congressman is willing to be, down to the VERY specific detail. And if Manchin plays games, they get to start again. Again, constructing policy is wayyyy harder than braindead repeal.
Not the same border deal afaik. Is it a sweetheart deal? Yes. Still not the same. AND this is politics and 4 more years of Fox screaming about immigrants, Dems know it’s an issue they can’t ignore. So why are they running on it? Because they need to appeal to as many voters as they can. Why do they need to appeal to as many voters as they can? Because. They. Need. All. 3. Houses. And. They. Know. It.
What? I’m not shocked about this. Like nice attempt to turn this around. Again, this is about WHY the Dems need all 3 and the GOP doesn’t. It’s because the GOP is trying (and succeeding) at ruling from the bench.
Is this the “why didn’t they do everything, everywhere, all at once?” So they could have done this in the 4 MONTHS that Obama had a filibuster proof majority (MAYBE, if a dem senator like Manchin didn’t play games). Obama decided to get ACA through. You know that thing that people didn’t have at the time and desperately needed? I don’t blame him for going for the new desperately needed item.
And this goes back to the difference between the nature of what Dems and GOP want to do:
Dems need to carefully research, craft, and write new legislation. VERY detailed policy. This takes a ton of time, effort, and political capital.
Compare that to GOP: All they want to do is repeal, like repeal the ACA. They don’t need to do careful research, or write detailed policy. They didn’t have a replacement ready. All they need to do is say “ACA is repealed”.
Dude. This whole conversation is how it doesn’t work as equally as you want to think. The whole point is that there is a MASSIVE difference between what it takes for what the Dems want to do, and what the GOP wants to do. Again, the Dems need all 3 to do much of anything. The GOP only needs 1 of the 3 to block pretty much everything, or as we’ve seen they can do it from the bench too.
The left: To actually write and pass progressive legislation takes a ton of actual work, effort, and time. And all 3 houses to pass it.
The right: Most (not all, most) of what they want is to sit on their ass and block things. And let Fox News whip people into Hysteria. It takes fuck all to do that.
Slow down, read carefully, and consider what I’ve written. Don’t jump to just wanting to be upset. Slow down and understand how and why it works differently.
Guess how often the Dems have had all 3. Drumroll please, it’s 4 of the last 24 years. Want to go back even further? Then it’s 6 of the last 44 years. Read that again, Dems have had all 3 for 6 years out of the last 44 fucking years.
That means for 20 of the last 24 years, they have been forced to reach across the aisle. Or if you want to go back further, that means for 38 fucking years of the last 44 year they have been forced to reach across the aisle.
And you’re amazed that they reach across the aisle? And you’re amazed that they go to the center to find voters?
Take another look at those years. If you want things to move left, you have to do a lot fucking better than giving them control for only 4 years every 24 years. A lot better than 6 years every 44 fucking years.
How do you move things left? By giving Dems consistent and overwhelming victories. That means all 3 houses, consistently and overwhelmingly.
deleted by creator
There’s that equivocation again… Turns out one party is willing to vote for good policy regardless of the party of people who came up with it.
Biden’s track record backs this up. He got some limited achievements through legislation and hard fought negotiations with legislators in both parties. But when he tried to bypass congressional gridlock and use executive authority, the courts intervened again and again.
Majorities in the the House and Senate would allow legislation which would be far more likely to survive legal battles than executive orders. And it would also potentially allow for action to be taken to deal with the courts themselves to reign in the more obvious abuses of power, corruption, and general shenanigans.
I also wonder: how often are the cons asked if they will be putting Democrats into their cabinet? Why is it normalized that the cons are expected to not reach out to anyone, but that the Democratic Party is supposed to bend over backwards to reach out to the most extremist and crazy elements of our country.
Appointing a Republican does not mean appointing a Republican politician.
Every president in your lifetime has appointed people who happened to be registered with the opposite party.
Including Donald Trump. One of his senior advisors was Ivanka Trump, and his own daughter was a registered Democrat at the time. Didn’t mean a thing.
Same bullshit Obama pulled when the Democrats had control of both houses. God that was frustrating, like watching kittens playing soccer while the clock ran out.
Yes I was a big fan of Obama the orator, but Obama the politician was completely incompetent. The other side mopped the floor with his whole 8 years. I really Hope™️ we’re not going to do that again.
I am willing to bet it will happen again because the US is a plutocracy masquerading as a democracy.
That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t vote against the most fascist and criminally corrupt — it means you need to universally fight the fascist-sympathizers and criminally corrupt!
Hey, who could question the appointment of James Comey to lead the FBI? What a brilliant demonstration of reaching across the aisle. Plus it recognized (like ALL Democratic presidents before and after) that Republicans were the party of law and order and the Director of the FBI was just too important a job to give to a Democrat. And in exchange for demonstrating his bipartisanship, Republicans dialed down the attacks and were responsible governing partners.
It’s a tactic that worked so well we should just keep doing it forever without ever learning our lesson.