• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Biden/Schumer/Pelosi Accountability Thread

Progressives are again demonstrating that they are a bunch of whiny crybabies. And it is usually people who would have no idea how to actually get anything done, but their faux outrage plays well on twitter.
 
Progressives are again demonstrating that they are a bunch of whiny crybabies. And it is usually people who would have no idea how to actually get anything done, but their faux outrage plays well on twitter.

Not to mention dumb. And yes, I am talking about my fellow Charlottean, Bree.
 
Progressives are again demonstrating that they are a bunch of whiny crybabies. And it is usually people who would have no idea how to actually get anything done, but their faux outrage plays well on twitter.

Dude this act is wearing pretty thin. When you find yourself joining up with rj you should probably re-evaluate things.
 
Progressives are again demonstrating that they are a bunch of whiny crybabies. And it is usually people who would have no idea how to actually get anything done, but their faux outrage plays well on twitter.

not sure where this is coming from, but ok
 
Dude this act is wearing pretty thin. When you find yourself joining up with rj you should probably re-evaluate things.

No act. Bree Newsome is acting like a whiny crybaby with her "Biden should send a goon squad to give Manchin a stern talking to" routine. totally ridiculous and tone death to the current reality. Not to mention that it isn't the president that whips votes in congress anyway.

And I have found that over the years I have agreed with rj on some issues and have disagreed with rj on some issues. I don't base my opinions on what rj's opinions are. I try to arrive at them independently.
 
Last edited:
not sure where this is coming from, but ok

Why won't you answer the crux of this issue?

How could anyone have gotten Manchin to change his position knowing that if you push too hard, he becomes a Republican and puts Moscow Mitch back in charge of the Senate?
 
I was referring more to you calling her a crybaby. I just don't understand the hostility.
 
the president plays no role in seeing that his agenda is carried through? he doesn't hold majority/minority leaders (and through them, whips) accountable? and is in turn accountable for their successes/failures?
 
that was the point of my two tweets - there's one left group who wants to place the blame on a stubborn member of congress (typically a conservative) and elide all mention of party leadership

and another one left group who are trying to place blame on the three names in the thread title and elide all mention of the stubborn member of congress

seems like it's more complex than either take, but I dunno. mixed in is a lot of handwringing about the people-who-are-more-left-than-me and Bernie Sanders and dumb sailor stuff that doesn't even directly apply to this but it's there.
 
I was referring more to you calling her a crybaby. I just don't understand the hostility.

I find alot of things that I see posted on twitter ridiculous. I wasn't aware that I had to be so concerned about offending Bree Newsome's sensibilities.

the president plays no role in seeing that his agenda is carried through? he doesn't hold majority/minority leaders (and through them, whips) accountable? and is in turn accountable for their successes/failures?

The president can attempt to apply leverage, but with 50 votes the leadership in the senate is in a very precarious situation outside of this vote, and the person you would be applying pressure to won in a huge conservative state, and the people who are demanding this pressure have put forward a candidate that lost to him by 40 plus in their last primary and 40 plus in the most recent senate election. What real leverage do they have over Manchin to apply?

As made famous in Seinfeld, Manchin has hand. Sucks but it sure is better than Mitch McConnell having hand. But some on the left want to act like since the Dems have 50 that they should be getting their complete progressive wish list of policies including the ones that Biden didn't even support. These are the same people who would be blaming Biden even if McConnell was the majority leader in the Senate, because EVERYTHING is the fault of establishment Democrats.
 
Last edited:
I find alot of things that I see posted on twitter ridiculous. I wasn't aware that I had to be so concerned about offending Bree Newsome's sensibilities.

I don't think Bree Newsome knows you exist, so you're good.

The president can attempt to apply leverage, but with 50 votes the leadership in the senate is in a very precarious situation outside of this vote, and the person you would be applying pressure to won in a huge conservative state, and the people who are demanding this pressure have put forward a candidate that lost to him by 40 plus in their last primary and 40 plus in the most recent senate election. What real leverage do they have over Manchin to apply?

Not sure. It's not my job to whip votes. At this point we might ask how anything in Washington gets accomplished since your post here seems to foreground the radical differences and desires each politician brings to the table and the difficulty in getting them to forgo their values temporarily (whether it be direct leverage or persuasion) for passing legislation.

But the point of the thread is accountability, and like I just posted it seems we're in danger of taking one extreme and downplaying the other in service of our own agenda when the reality is probably more complex than that. We can't ignore Manchin being a stick in the mud, but we can't ignore Biden's inaugural planting its flag in the trope of unity either.
 
But some on the left want to act like since the Dems have 50 that they should be getting their complete progressive wish list of policies including the ones that Biden didn't even support. These are the same people who would be blaming Biden even if McConnell was the majority leader in the Senate, because EVERYTHING is the fault of establishment Democrats.

That seems like a pretty typical form of political agonism to me. Every party is going to have factions that demand the party move in another direction and sometimes they are even ravenous about it too!

Sometimes (read: almost every time) the party shifts because of that action (diff. '08 Dems and '20 Dems) are stark. What is the difference between looking at that agonism scornfully in 2008 and looking at it scornfully in 2020?
 
Last edited:
Not sure. It's not my job to whip votes. At this point we might ask how anything in Washington gets accomplished since your post here seems to foreground the radical differences and desires each politician brings to the table and the difficulty in getting them to forgo their values temporarily (whether it be direct leverage or persuasion) for passing legislation.

But the point of the thread is accountability, and like I just posted it seems we're in danger of taking one extreme and downplaying the other in service of our own agenda when the reality is probably more complex than that. We can't ignore Manchin being a stick in the mud, but we can't ignore Biden's inaugural planting its flag in the trope of unity either.

Only if you ignore the fact that a 50/50 tie is a very precarious situation that could literally change the balance of the senate with the decision of one person, and that person is from one party that routinely loses in the state by huge margins.

And you also ignore the fact that the last time the senate was 50/50 that somebody did switch parties and changed the balance of the senate over a disagreement of the party leaders.
 
I'm not ignoring those facts? I think those points are relevant to discussions of political accountability. I don't think they change the central argument of my post though.
 
the president plays no role in seeing that his agenda is carried through? he doesn't hold majority/minority leaders (and through them, whips) accountable? and is in turn accountable for their successes/failures?

That's simplistic in a unique situation. It's a tie in the Senate. If you "hold Manchin accountable", he has a ready and willing place to go.

Your position could be realistic in 23 if Dems add 2-3 seats in the 22 election and don't need Manchin to maintain control.

At this point, they need him to stay in power. Thus, your idealistic concepts aren't really in play now.
 
Biden did his primary job. The Dem Senate candidate only lost one race that Biden won. If Wisconsin and Pennsylvania were up for grabs, Democrats may have a majority and more wiggle room.

Now you can argue Schumer failed to get candidates who could outperform Biden.

I’m not sure what Biden can offer Manchin but that’s on Schumer to come up with bills he can get passed.
 
For those who were complaining about Biden and Covid. He has sent FEMA to inner cities and rural underserved areas to get the vaccines to people who can't get to other locations.

My bad, Biden has failed because after taking office with no inventory and no plans to deliver medicine to the less fortunate and people of color in 40 or so days he hasn't delivered 300,000,000 vaccines (regardless of whether they exist or not).
 
Last edited:
That seems like a pretty typical form of political agonism to me. Every party is going to have factions that demand the party move in another direction and sometimes they are even ravenous about it too!

Sometimes (read: almost every time) the party shifts because of that action (diff. '08 Dems and '20 Dems) are stark. What is the difference between looking at that agonism scornfully in 2008 and looking at it scornfully in 2020?
Yeah between 2008 and 2020 we've had a bunch of conservative judges, attempts to repeal progressive movements in health care, and tax cuts. And I would put it out there that the change in viewpoint of the electorate are because of a lot of other factors than progressive demanding, threatening, and generally helping republicans get elected.
 
 
Back
Top