Home » Democrat infighting threatens to derail their transformative agenda – for now

Comments

Democrat infighting threatens to derail their transformative agenda – for now — 16 Comments

  1. “50/50 split in the Senate does not, in fact, give one party a broad mandate to completely transform the nation into a socialist paradise.”

    They went through all that trouble to steal a Federal election (along with several senatorial elections)…and then went—and continue to go—all out to deny, obfuscate, and prevent discovery while declaiming such noble sentiments as “UNITY” and “TRANSPARENCY” (no doubt to go with “Fundamental Transformation”).

    Surely, all that must be worth something….

    Just as surely, the nation stands in awe of their competence… (well at some things at least…).

  2. The D’s don’t care.

    They hold all 3 branches of government so they’re gonna do whatever they want.

    Add in a submissive press, 100% control of Public Education, along with a vice grip on culture.

    The D’s can do whatever they want … wherever they want.

    Depressing … isn’t it?

  3. The Ds don’t, in fact, hold all three branches of government. The Supreme Court tilts marginally right, although not as solidly as many would like.

    As for the submissive press, I would call it more than submissive — it is an out-and-out cheerleader for the far left. Public education is a sad case, and the only thing that keeps me from saying it has given 100% control to the Ds is that more and more parents are finding alternatives — home schooling or church school. Of course this doesn’t work very well in the inner city, but I’m not sure students in the inner city are learning anything more than how to prey on each other. It is a phenomenally sad situation.

    I think a major problem for the left right now — especially the far left — is that they think this is their moment. If they don’t push all their chips onto the table, they might not get another opportunity like this. And I think that is largely the case. It is fairly certain — absent enormous vote fraud — that they will lose a lot of seats in 2022, and likely lose the White House in 2024. But if they push too hard right now, they risk alienating even more “moderate” voters and Congresspeople. So they need to go all in and risk losing everything, or be more moderate and perhaps not get their 3.5 Trillion “everything” package.

    Time to pop some popcorn and watch the turmoil from the sidelines.

  4. In specifics, if not in principle, I somewhat disagree with neo’s assertion that “the “moderate Democrat” has become mostly a myth”

    I disagree somewhat in that today’s “moderate democrats” are yesteryear’s radical democrats. They are the ones riding upon today’s progressive tiger’s back. Appeasement of that ‘tiger’ is their only means of clinging to power.

    They are the equivalent to Bill Clinton’s gradual, incremental, “boil the frog” progressivism versus Hillary’s “off with their heads!” ‘progressivism’. (the squad would have been much happier with Hillary’s progressivism but might well have lost their heads…)

    “the “progressives” (that is, the fanatic left) seem to be in control.

    Again yesteryears radicals, Pelosi, Schumer, etc are appeasing today’s progressive radicals because the democrat party’s base can keep them from reelection. Not by replacing enough of yesteryear’s radical progressives but by spliting the party and handing too many seats to republicans.

    Yesteryear’s radical democrats tell today’s radical democrats that they want the same thing, have the same goals. Perhaps some actually have themselves ‘convinced’ of it. But they argue that small bites will get more than trying to force the whole agenda down American’s throats.

    What they can’t face is that the really radical democrats want to force it down our throats and send any who resist to the killing fields. It’s the young who cling to yesteryear’s radical vision who they want to send to the reeducation camps.

  5. I think overall this is a good thing. Strict party line voting seems to be a recent trend.

    That said. I do not particularly like Manchin. But I think he realizes that a vote for this bill simply because of its enormous size. Is a signal that we will simply inflate our way out of the debt problem. The markets and companies seem to be waiting on some sort of understanding on which direction we are going. To try to keep prices in check. Or to just accept the inflation and run with it.

    Some things its already been hard to keep inflation in check. Fuel,meats, fresh foods. Those items come to market very quickly. But some things like grains, furnishings etc. That can be kept longer term have not sharp increases…yet.

    But I think this bill would be a big signal to simply let the prices fly. And deal with the consequences later. I think its likely Manchin realizes this and know he would get outsized blame in his state for what would happen over the next 2 years.

  6. Politics is a bit of a hobby to Republicans. Not a lifetime career in most cases. To Democrats, it is the lifetime career. Look how many members of Congress on the Democrat side have ever held a non-political job. There are, of course Republicans who have no other working history, like Paul Ryan for example, but Democrats have politics and lobbying as career options and some political success is needed for the other career. They pay close attention to polling and the likelihood of re-election. That is where the hesitancy about this monster spending bill is coming from.

  7. As someone else pointed out, Pelosi is willing to sacrifice the House Democrats in marginal seats to get this passed. She knows it can happen. It happened in 2010, after Obamacare.

    But they got Obamacare. And John McCain, in a trademark fit of pique, made sure it stayed.

    Now, they can see it, all their dreams, which mainly consist of a permanent rule. If they can just force easy-to-cheat rules on the states, and dump billions into union get-the-vote-out-of-the-cemetary efforts, well, it could happen. After all, Pelosi et al aren’t fools. They know exactly how it was done in 2020, and they’re determined to do it again.

    10,000 votes can flip pretty much any House or Senate race. Look at Arizona, where a survey suggests as many as 100,000 votes never made it back into the counting center. Do you think your letter carrier doesn’t know your political leanings? Of course he does. He sees which party’s mailings show up at your door.

    It’s like when Scott Adams suggests that both parties want elections the voters can trust. A, that’s a mistaken assumption. One party, at least, doesn’t give a crap, and they have the media lined up behind them. They think things are working just fine, and if they can brazen it through one more time, they’ll have the permanent control they desire.

  8. Pelosi had said the House would vote the smaller “infrastructure” bill tomorrow. We’ll see if she allows that, and what happens. It’s possible both that bill and the massive “reconciliation” bill will go down. We can hope

  9. Mike K. When Republicans want to make money, they go into business. When Democrats want to make money they go into government. That’s why Democrat run cities and States are such bastions of corruption.

  10. Whenever they really want 50 votes + Kamala they have 50 votes + Kamala. Sometimes they borrow some Rs to get there. The Sinemas and McCains are not allowed to interfere when it’s what the bulk of the Uniparty wants. The Dems are not captured by the far left any more than the R’s are by the far right. It comes down to crony capitalism fundamentally. In order to deliver to their cronies they have to be in office and have to pander to their base, and the Designated Maverick is a necessary part of that strategy.

    When Republicans want to make money, they go into business. When Democrats want to make money they go into government.

    Plenty of Republicans making plenty of money going into government and steering that money to business. Elaine Chao sits on boards just as Hunter Biden does; I don’t doubt that she’s better qualified, but if her husband wasn’t the Senate Minority Leader her presence on boards would not be worth as much as if he weren’t.

  11. They don’t care about having a mandate, as in they’ll do whatever they want with or without a mandate, but they certainly like to pretend they have a mandate.

  12. What shadow said….
    – – – – – – – – –

    “I think its likely Manchin realizes this and know he would get outsized blame in his state for what would happen over the next 2 years.”

    Perhaps.

    But I would prefer to believe that Manchin is doing it for a far better, far more noble reason: to save the country. (Kindly try not to laugh too hard…)

    …Or if that last is a bit of a stretch, then how ’bout just, Because he’s not totally and utterly insane (IOW because he’s not onboard with his party’s plan to destroy his country…in fact, he’s resisting it with all the courage he can muster):

    ‘Manchin Slams Dem Spending Plan As “Definition Of Fiscal Insanity”, Will Not “Reengineer Social Fabric” With ‘Vengeful’ Taxation’
    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/senate-will-vote-avert-shutdown-pelosi-reschedules-infrastructure-vote-after-progressives

    …Of course, this ought to lead to the next—and only logical—question: Why is Manchin STILL a Democrat?

  13. Time to learn a little (more) Russian, perhaps.
    (They have lots of experience in certain areas….)

    From the people who brought us such useful—even invaluable—words as vodka, caviar, da, nyet, pravda, dozdavanya, perestroika, glasnost and sputnik (and so many others)…
    …we introduce: PAKUDNYAK!

    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17812/paskudnyak

  14. Reports this morning are that Pelosi will not call the vote on the (smaller) infrastructure bill; she doesn’t have the votes. Also, Manchin says he won’t vote for the “reconciliation” bill at any price tag if it doesn’t have the Hyde Amendment preventing government funding of elective abortions.

    It’s nice to think of Pelosi’s angst; she deserves it. But she usually succeeds, so we’ll see.

  15. I agree that the honesty and integrity of Republicans is only marginally better then most Democrats. The Clintons and Pelosi are off the scale, of course.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>