Manchin’s Compromised Voting Bill

[TexasTiger 12,969]

Seems reasonable.Thoughts?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/06/16/manchin-proposes-compromise-on-voting-bills.html

[bigbird 60,576]

Compromise is always best

[bigbird 60,576]

    "Congressional action on federal voting rights legislation must be the result of both Democrats and Republicans coming together to find a pathway forward or we risk further dividing and destroying the republic we swore to protect and defend as elected officials,"

 

Sometimes it seems like he is the only one left with common sense.  We need a POTUS like him that values common sense, understands the value and power of compromise, and is strong enough to stand up to the leadership of both parties.

[homersapien 11,401]

22 minutes ago, bigbird said:

    "Congressional action on federal voting rights legislation must be the result of both Democrats and Republicans coming together to find a pathway forward or we risk further dividing and destroying the republic we swore to protect and defend as elected officials,"

 

Sometimes it seems like he is the only one left with common sense.  We need a POTUS like him that values common sense, understands the value and power of compromise, and is strong enough to stand up to the leadership of both parties.

The problem is with McConnell and the Republicans when it comes to compromise. McConnell is dedicated to obstruction.  He said as much when Obama is president and nothing has changed with Biden.

[bigbird 60,576]

15 minutes ago, homersapien said:

The problem is with McConnell and the Republicans when it comes to compromise. McConnell is dedicated to obstruction.  He said as much when Obama is president and nothing has changed with Biden.

Because so much was accomplished when he was in charge. There wasn't any obstruction coming from the left, right?

[AU9377 5,000]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Seems reasonable.Thoughts?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/06/16/manchin-proposes-compromise-on-voting-bills.html

It does seem reasonable.  The Bill wouldn't change much in most states, but it would prevent some states from reducing the number of early voting days and in others it would increase the number to 15.  I'm not sure that we need a national holiday to vote, given that someone will have 15 other days to vote in person, but as a whole it does open the door to negotiations.   Unfortunately, I have doubts that it will gain Republican support.

[homersapien 11,401]

33 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Because so much was accomplished when he was in charge. There wasn't any obstruction coming from the left, right?

Not sure what you mean by the first sentence.  Obama handled the financial crisis (albeit in a limited way due to Republican opposition) as well as providing us the ACA ("Obamacare"). Otherwise, McConnell stymied his agenda.

McConnell literally said that his only purpose was to "make Obama a one term president".

McConnell also said he's '100 percent' focused on 'stopping' Biden's administration.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/mcconnell-says-he-s-100-percent-focused-stopping-biden-s-n1266443

McConnell is the personification of Republican intransigence on every issue (except for tax breaks to the rich).

 

[SLAG-91 1,483]

2 minutes ago, bigbird said:

    "Congressional action on federal voting rights legislation must be the result of both Democrats and Republicans coming together to find a pathway forward or we risk further dividing and destroying the republic we swore to protect and defend as elected officials,"

 

Sometimes it seems like he is the only one left with common sense.

He is an "old school" Democrat (almost 74) representing a conservative state

This is probably the hard-boiled cynic in me, but I also think he's acutely aware of just how much power he has in a 50-50 Senate, along with a few others that their respective parties consider "squishy" (Collins, Murkowski for the Rs, Manchin and probably Sinema, too, for the Ds).

There's pretty much always a reasonable compromise to be found on most items...but that is a dirty word these days.

[AU9377 5,000]

29 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Because so much was accomplished when he was in charge. There wasn't any obstruction coming from the left, right?

There will always be opposing views and legislation. What we have now is a government in paralysis.  I understand that some view that as preferable to legislation that they oppose and that is a fair point.  My issue with McConnell from the Obama years to now is that he refuses to engage in an effort to address problems that need to be addressed.  The ACA could have been a much better system both when it was initially passed and as amended in later years, but McConnell refused to debate anything other than the total repeal of the law without new legislation to take its place. By doing so, he endorsed the idea that there was no problem with health care in this country.  We all know that has never been true.  Yet, here we are, 10 plus years later, with the only attempt at a solution having been passed in the first 2 years of the first Obama term.

[bigbird 60,576]

48 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

There will always be opposing views and legislation. What we have now is a government in paralysis.  I understand that some view that as preferable to legislation that they oppose and that is a fair point.  My issue with McConnell from the Obama years to now is that he refuses to engage in an effort to address problems that need to be addressed.  The ACA could have been a much better system both when it was initially passed and as amended in later years, but McConnell refused to debate anything other than the total repeal of the law without new legislation to take its place. By doing so, he endorsed the idea that there was no problem with health care in this country.  We all know that has never been true.  Yet, here we are, 10 plus years later, with the only attempt at a solution having been passed in the first 2 years of the first Obama term.

I agree completely, but to single only the right out for obstruction is laughable.

[homersapien 11,401]

2 hours ago, bigbird said:

I agree completely, but to single only the right out for obstruction is laughable.

That's pretty weak tea considering the Republicans won't even allow an independent commission to investigate a violent insurrection on the capital.  An insurrection specifically meant to thwart a legal election.

Why do you suppose that is?

 

[bigbird 60,576]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That's pretty weak tea considering the Republicans won't even allow an independent commission to investigate a violent insurrection on the capital.  An insurrection specifically meant to thwart a legal election.

Why do you suppose that is?

 

It's only weak tea to you because it's against your side. Any objectivity and it wouldn't be.

[homersapien 11,401]

10 minutes ago, bigbird said:

It's only weak tea to you because it's against your side. Any objectivity and it wouldn't be.

Oooooooooooooo!   What a wicked come-back!  Is that the best you could come up with to evade the question?

Look, I am not going to apologize for being liberal (small "L").  But the issues are the issues. 

Do you deny that Trump and the Republican party are still claiming the election was stolen? 

Do you deny they are still making efforts to either overturn the election (Arizona "audit") or to cover-up their intentions (preventing an independent investigation of 9/6)?  It's not Democrats behaving this way, nor have they ever behaved this way (at least in modern times).

You are hiding behind whataboutism and accusations of bias to avoid addressing actual facts and issues.    Either engage substantively or just admit you're a Trumper.

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by homersapien

[bigbird 60,576]

Just now, homersapien said:

Do you deny that Trump and the Republican party are still claiming the election was stolen? 

As a whole, yes. Are there still some, yes. Just like there are still some Dems that claim 2000 and 2016 were stolen. 

 

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Do you deny they are still making efforts to either overturn the election (Arizona "audit") or to cover-up their actual intentions (preventing an independent investigation of 9/6)?

Nope. An absolute waste of time and money that only perpetuates division.

 

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You are hiding behind whataboutism and accusations of bias to avoid addressing actual facts and issues.    Either engage substantively or just admit you're a Trumper.

Which facts, you think Dems don't obstruct. Period. That's a dumb thought. Why engage and perpetuate intentional blindness. 

Resort to name calling, I don't care.  Out of the two of us, one admits to bias and only sees things through that lens. There is absolutely no good that comes from debating one that refuses to admit any possibility of fault from his position.

[TexasTiger 12,969]

2 hours ago, bigbird said:

As a whole, yes. Are there still some, yes. Just like there are still some Dems that claim 2000 and 2016 were stolen. 

 

Nope. An absolute waste of time and money that only perpetuates division.

 

Which facts, you think Dems don't obstruct. Period. That's a dumb thought. Why engage and perpetuate intentional blindness. 

Resort to name calling, I don't care.  Out of the two of us, one admits to bias and only sees things through that lens. There is absolutely no good that comes from debating one that refuses to admit any possibility of fault from his position.

If I admit Dems can and do “obstruct” at times, can you at least recognize no one has ever topped Mitch?

[bigbird 60,576]

26 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

If I admit Dems can and do “obstruct” at times, can you at least recognize no one has ever topped Mitch?

I 100% agree, never said otherwise.  Others do it quite often, but Mitch has perfected it. What's the saying, don't hate the player, hate the game.  There's nothing healthy about a stagnant congress. Sadly, it's only the constituents that are effected.

[TexasTiger 12,969]

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

I 100% agree, never said otherwise.  Others do it quite often, but Mitch has perfected it. What's the saying, don't hate the player, hate the game.  There's nothing healthy about a stagnant congress. Sadly, it's only the constituents that are effected.

He changed the rules of the game, so I think it’s fair to harbor a healthy dislike for the sumbitch. 😉

[bigbird 60,576]

36 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

He changed the rules of the game, so I think it’s fair to harbor a healthy dislike for the sumbitch. 😉

No one is stopping that.

[TexasTiger 12,969]

10 minutes ago, bigbird said:

No one is stopping that.

He and Newt are special in this regard.

[bigbird 60,576]

@icanthearyou

 

[homersapien 11,401]

23 hours ago, bigbird said:

There is absolutely no good that comes from debating one that refuses to admit any possibility of fault from his position.

Please go back and point out where I suggested that.

You are debating with a straw man of your own imagination.

Edited June 19, 2021 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,401]

23 hours ago, bigbird said:

As a whole, yes. Are there still some, yes. Just like there are still some Dems that claim 2000 and 2016 were stolen.

 

What are they actually doing about it?

There is a case to be made for 2000, but most - actually, pretty much all - Democrats have simply moved on. 

Anyone who equates such a statement with the active, ongoing belief that Trump actually won in 2020 is not being objective. 

53% of Republicans view Trump as true U.S. president -Reuters/Ipsos

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/53-republicans-view-trump-true-us-president-reutersipsos-2021-05-24/

 

Clearly you are guilty of what you accuse me of.

[bigbird 60,576]

29 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Democrats have simply moved on. 

After 21 years, I'd hope so.

[bigbird 60,576]

Interesting that we are now so far from the OP.  

[homersapien 11,401]

1 minute ago, bigbird said:

After 21 years, I'd hope so.

Actually they started moving on by Dec. 13, 2000 when Gore conceded for the sake of the country.

You should try to keep up.