5 ms·

Was it impossible? Youre quite sure? Or maybe it was just easier for them to call republicans fascist while forcing it through with a super majority? As oppos

Was it impossible? Youre quite sure? Or maybe it was just easier for them to call republicans fascist while forcing it through with a super majority? As opposed to the excellent state and not "unusually obstructive " form that democrats left the nation with after 4 years of never trump? Pelosi played political brinksmanship and chicken with thousands of peoples lives just to pass relief after trump lost.

AlisdairO 6y ago
More or less, yes. Take a look at the ACA. This is a piece of legislation that was essentially conservative in nature. It pleased very few on the democratic side, and bore plenty of similarities to some republican plans from the 90s. The Republicans reacted as if communism was coming to America. It should be noted that this approach was an explicit plan that was noted by many at the time - some choice quotes in this article: https://swampland.time.com/2012/08/23/the-party-of-no-new-details-on-the-gop-plot-to-obstruct-obama/ https://swampland.time.com/2012/08/23/the-party-of-no-new-de... > As opposed to the excellent state and not "unusually obstructive " form that democrats left the nation with after 4 years of never trump? During the Trump administration, the Republicans had 2 years of controlling the house, the senate, AND the presidency. Not sure how much you think the Democrats could obstruct in that situation. In the following two years there's been just a democratic house, from which the Republican senate majority leader has been more or less unwilling to review legislation. And not just democratic-lead legislation - plenty of bipartisan legislation has been ignore too. Really not sure why you're giving Pelosi sole blame for the failure to come to an agreement on stimulus. McConnell seems to be the clearest blocker here: seems there was hope for the White House and the House to come to an agreement, which McConnell scuppered: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2020/10/15/mcconnell-wont-support-18-trillion-white-house-stimulus-bill-even-if-pelosi-and-trump-make-a-deal/?sh=66120b8d5a8a https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2020/10/15/mcconnel... .
- arkis22 6y ago
  the ACA was passed during a supermajority. You just said that democrats couldn't interfere with the republicans during theirs, so how on earth did the democrats pass a bill that they didn't like? Not a single republican voted for the bill. I think that probably removes any intelligent reference you could make to Romneycare, which was bipartisan and for a single state. It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. No small immediate relief for renters getting the boot with a 1 trillion price tag that they could immediately add to. Your own article said McConnell wanted relief. It was her 2.2 trillion or nothing and she chose nothing. She did it knowing it would hurt trump. If she cared she'd do what she could to help and pass the trillion no?
  - AlisdairO 6y ago
    > the ACA was passed during a supermajority. Nope. Lieberman was an independent and broke with the democrats on many issues, including the ACA: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-barack-obama-us-healthcare https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-... . Funnily enough, this kind of makes my point for me. Even during a near-supermajority, the Dems could barely pass some conservative healthcare reform, because the republicans threatened to filibuster almost everything. Historical report here: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 . The filibuster has since been watered down to reduce that kind of abuse - and honestly I think the Democrats have learned that they need to play hardball, because Republicans sure as hell aren't interested in compromise. In fairness to you, I did under-consider the effects of the use of the filibuster during Trump's term - appears that while the power of the filibuster has in general been watered down, the Democrats have been using it aggressively to block Trump's nominations. I wonder if the republicans regret kicking off this trend. > Not a single republican voted for the bill Sadly, we've reached a world where politicians largely vote as a block, not on their personal beliefs. I'd take this as indications of precisely nothing other than strategy. If you look at the bill itself, it's conservative, and a clear compromise from what the majority of Democrats want. > It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. Patently untrue - she's already come down from an initial position of 3T. So unless Pelosi caves to the Republicans' exact demands it's all on her? Let's imagine McConnell says that he'll approve a relief bill containing a trillion for the rich and a buck or two for the poor, is Pelosi solely responsible for delaying relief? Pelosi is trying to get a level of relief that she views as appropriate. Of course the threat of walking away has to be there - otherwise the other side is free to offer something completely inadequate. If Pelosi and Trump of all people can get close to agreeing, it's worth considering pointing the blame at McConnell.
    - arkis22 6y ago
      so here's the timeline of the bill. https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-act/history-timeline-affordable-care-act-aca https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-a... It didn't even matter that Lieberman was independent. he's literally not mentioned. and it looks like we're both wrong, apparently there was one republican who voted for it. lol, what is your point? her position is now my 2.2 or nothing. and she was super happy with nothing. her level of relief is apparently 0. but she can walk away morally and the republicans can't right? jeez. imagine being called amoral for asking for less lol

AlisdairO 6y ago

More or less, yes. Take a look at the ACA. This is a piece of legislation that was essentially conservative in nature. It pleased very few on the democratic side, and bore plenty of similarities to some republican plans from the 90s. The Republicans reacted as if communism was coming to America. It should be noted that this approach was an explicit plan that was noted by many at the time - some choice quotes in this article: https://swampland.time.com/2012/08/23/the-party-of-no-new-details-on-the-gop-plot-to-obstruct-obama/ https://swampland.time.com/2012/08/23/the-party-of-no-new-de... > As opposed to the excellent state and not "unusually obstructive " form that democrats left the nation with after 4 years of never trump? During the Trump administration, the Republicans had 2 years of controlling the house, the senate, AND the presidency. Not sure how much you think the Democrats could obstruct in that situation. In the following two years there's been just a democratic house, from which the Republican senate majority leader has been more or less unwilling to review legislation. And not just democratic-lead legislation - plenty of bipartisan legislation has been ignore too. Really not sure why you're giving Pelosi sole blame for the failure to come to an agreement on stimulus. McConnell seems to be the clearest blocker here: seems there was hope for the White House and the House to come to an agreement, which McConnell scuppered: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2020/10/15/mcconnell-wont-support-18-trillion-white-house-stimulus-bill-even-if-pelosi-and-trump-make-a-deal/?sh=66120b8d5a8a https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2020/10/15/mcconnel... .

arkis22 6y ago
the ACA was passed during a supermajority. You just said that democrats couldn't interfere with the republicans during theirs, so how on earth did the democrats pass a bill that they didn't like? Not a single republican voted for the bill. I think that probably removes any intelligent reference you could make to Romneycare, which was bipartisan and for a single state. It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. No small immediate relief for renters getting the boot with a 1 trillion price tag that they could immediately add to. Your own article said McConnell wanted relief. It was her 2.2 trillion or nothing and she chose nothing. She did it knowing it would hurt trump. If she cared she'd do what she could to help and pass the trillion no?
- AlisdairO 6y ago
  > the ACA was passed during a supermajority. Nope. Lieberman was an independent and broke with the democrats on many issues, including the ACA: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-barack-obama-us-healthcare https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-... . Funnily enough, this kind of makes my point for me. Even during a near-supermajority, the Dems could barely pass some conservative healthcare reform, because the republicans threatened to filibuster almost everything. Historical report here: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 . The filibuster has since been watered down to reduce that kind of abuse - and honestly I think the Democrats have learned that they need to play hardball, because Republicans sure as hell aren't interested in compromise. In fairness to you, I did under-consider the effects of the use of the filibuster during Trump's term - appears that while the power of the filibuster has in general been watered down, the Democrats have been using it aggressively to block Trump's nominations. I wonder if the republicans regret kicking off this trend. > Not a single republican voted for the bill Sadly, we've reached a world where politicians largely vote as a block, not on their personal beliefs. I'd take this as indications of precisely nothing other than strategy. If you look at the bill itself, it's conservative, and a clear compromise from what the majority of Democrats want. > It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. Patently untrue - she's already come down from an initial position of 3T. So unless Pelosi caves to the Republicans' exact demands it's all on her? Let's imagine McConnell says that he'll approve a relief bill containing a trillion for the rich and a buck or two for the poor, is Pelosi solely responsible for delaying relief? Pelosi is trying to get a level of relief that she views as appropriate. Of course the threat of walking away has to be there - otherwise the other side is free to offer something completely inadequate. If Pelosi and Trump of all people can get close to agreeing, it's worth considering pointing the blame at McConnell.
  - arkis22 6y ago
    so here's the timeline of the bill. https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-act/history-timeline-affordable-care-act-aca https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-a... It didn't even matter that Lieberman was independent. he's literally not mentioned. and it looks like we're both wrong, apparently there was one republican who voted for it. lol, what is your point? her position is now my 2.2 or nothing. and she was super happy with nothing. her level of relief is apparently 0. but she can walk away morally and the republicans can't right? jeez. imagine being called amoral for asking for less lol