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
Technically, Chuck voted to keep the government shut down. According to some people other than Chuck he was in constant contact with the group who crossed the aisle for nothing in return, but he didn't vote with them.
Yeah, the consensus seems to be that Chuck essentially engineered this new "deal" but he knew it would be wildly unpopular so he had only the senators who aren't up for election next year vote yes, while he voted no to keep his hands clean. Classic slimy bullshit from a classic slimy bullshitter.
Exactly.
Call your (blue) senators. Doesn't matter if they voted for or against it. Explain that you aren't fooled and that it was blatantly obvious that schumer had his whip get the yes votes on behalf of the republicans.
This battle is lost. But this is far from the first time a schumer led Democratic party did trump's work for him. schumer and durbin don't need to step down as Senators (but they really fucking should) but they DO need to step down as minority leader and whip in favor of someone who isn't a complete and utter failure, at best.
Otherwise? You'll assume that your senator(s) were some of the real yeses who caved.
He offered the first shit sandwich by floating the idea of only a one year extension instead of permanent and these 8 doubled down. That was after he rolled over this past spring.
He shares a lot of the blame.
Not just that; he's the fucking minority leader. It's his job to coerce Democrats to vote in a unified manner.
Well, no — it’s his job to lead them in a unified vision. It’s then the whip’s job to coerce them. And Durbin, who capitulated this time, is the whip.
So Schumer is directly responsible for Durbin, and the two of them together are responsible for all the rolling over.
Convince, not coerce. But otherwise spot on.
Either would have been fine.
The one year extension was a genuinely good strategy. It is a very reasonable way to discuss this when there is more time and people aren't starving... that would have put us exactly back where we were on Tuesday for the "real" midterms.
A one month extension... would have let the democrats go home for thanksgiving, I guess? But would also be immediately abandoned because it's xmas!
But this was getting absolutely nothing. johnson is already saying he won't call a vote for the ACA.
The one year strategy was fucking terrible. They already had the Republicans owning their own goal and offered to let them win for a single year's reprieve. It was caving in right after massive election wins showing that the public was blaming the right people for once.
This is worse, but that was terrible and opened the doors for completely undermining the entire reason for the shutdown.
I've been following how the senate has voted on shit from the beginning of Trump's second presidency. What I'm finding is that they all take turns crossing the aisle to spread out the hate they would get from their own party for doing so. Schumer, and Gillibrand, who are senators for my state both voted to confirm his cabinet picks. I've been pissed with them since day one.
That just means he found enough Dem Senators to take the heat so he didn't have to also vote for it. It's not like he said "Hold the line" and those 8 defied him. No, it was all agreed to between him and them. This is what he wanted. As minority leader the blame is on him in spite of his 'no' vote.