General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHelp him, don't fight him.
Link to tweet
Dear Progressive Friends,
Joe Biden may not be Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. However he may well be the most progressive US president since FDR & in many ways, he is much more progressive than him. He can make more progressive change happen. Help him, don't fight him.
Just look what he has accomplished in 40 days.
Cha
(296,876 posts)In the midst of a pandemic which has, rightfully so been his main focus. However he and his team can multitask and have done so.
Cha
(296,876 posts)don't see anybody else who was able to get as Far as Joe Biden!
And, constructive criticism yes.. but No ******* Gaslighting! Look at the Damn Big Picture for ONCE!
Link to tweet
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)Cha
(296,876 posts)brush
(53,743 posts)FDR's challenges, and even more than Pres. Obama's Great Recession obstacles.
Lincoln of course had the greatest tasks before him on taking office, then IMO, FDR, now Biden's and Obama's, from which Joe got valuable experience.
questionseverything
(9,645 posts)Or is the tweet specifically about something?
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)None of which was aimed at those deemed 'progressive'.
IMHO, progressive means progress. You get it done.
questionseverything
(9,645 posts)So what is the tweet you chose to post referring to?
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)and those that make progress.
pro·gres·sive
/prəˈɡresiv/
happening or developing gradually or in stages; proceeding step by step.
a person advocating or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas.
"people tend to present themselves either as progressives or traditionalists on this issue"
questionseverything
(9,645 posts)?
Cha
(296,876 posts)Help!
Sure isn't going to get from those who only think about themselves.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Cha
(296,876 posts)wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)it's the rightwing democrats that have been fucking Biden all this time on the stimulus package and the Tanden nomination.
mcar
(42,278 posts)We've been told we've already lost the House in 2022 because one thing wasn't included. Some insist on completely disregarding the historic affect of this bill.
George II
(67,782 posts)jcgoldie
(11,613 posts)...so far its the other end of the Democratic Caucus...
Mister Ed
(5,924 posts)greatauntoftriplets
(175,729 posts)That's precisely what we need to get out of this current mess.
stillcool
(32,626 posts)it's just how those voices are used. It's one thing to advocate, another to just criticize. I think people in this country have lost the ability to be kind and civil.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)It's an important and valid message.
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)A message to be heard and heeded.
LetMyPeopleVote
(144,945 posts)JI7
(89,241 posts)His own history shows that even before he became President.
demtenjeep
(31,997 posts)He will be the most consequential president in our lifetime
George II
(67,782 posts)oasis
(49,338 posts)IngridsLittleAngel
(1,962 posts)1. Even if he wasn't "my guy" during the 2020 primaries, I am so far very pleased and highly impressed with Biden, his efforts, his plans and everything he has done since he was sworn in, putting an end to a four year error/nightmare where we had no president.
2. I can once again only speak for this progressive, but, I am absolutely behind helping him, and will save my energy for fighting those who would rather sabotage Biden than stand with him.
I'll gladly take another 1400~ days like the first 40 or so.
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)IngridsLittleAngel
(1,962 posts)And I'll go a step further to say (ahh, the risks of posting without enough caffeine in the brain) that not only am I very impressed and pleased with Biden, I'll say his first 45 or so days in office are everything I would've imagined us having if the winner had been Sanders or Warren. Progressives should all be behind Biden because he has absolutely been progressive, and is showing no signs of slowing down or letting up.
mcar
(42,278 posts)Welcome to DU.
IngridsLittleAngel
(1,962 posts)Though, I've been around for quite a few years. I've just spent more time lurking than posting until the last 10-12 months.
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)Cha
(296,876 posts)mcar
(42,278 posts)Shame on those on the left who tried to stop this real progress and those who continue to complain that it's not good enough.
You try doing this under these circumstances.
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)He did it with the help of other progressive leaders. Schumer and so many others. The senate pulled an all nighter and the weak gopers wee wee'd all the way home to rest their weary heads. Then BOOM! Merrick Garland made first base!!!!! Brilliant.
I can't stop laughing. Home run and a touchdown to boot. That was one hell of a marathon.
v
Was it the left that kept Tanden from getting nominated?
Was it the left that kept threatening the passage of the stimulus package so that they can water it down?
Was it the left that promised to keep the legislative rules intact so that it's more difficult for Biden to implement his agenda?
Nope it was the right, and yet you are focused on the dirtbag lefty boogieman.
George II
(67,782 posts)wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 7, 2021, 08:21 PM - Edit history (1)
Your boy Manchin
George II
(67,782 posts)....another Senator did.
By the way, "my boy Manchin" is a Democrat, do you have a problem with Democrats?
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)Your boy Manchin made it clear he wasn't voting for her. Just take the L, self induced by a fellow Democrat.
George II
(67,782 posts)Only one Senator who caucuses with the Democrats publicly castigated Tanden (a Democrat) during a formal Senate proceeding. It wasn't "my boy" (why do you persist in stating that about a DEMOCRATIC Senator?) Manchin.
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)Not sure what you're trying to accomplish with this posturing
Celerity
(43,136 posts)the House.
The Senate? well..........., there are 3 (at least, and 2 very specifically) who are going to cause us big trouble between now and 2022. Ironically the 2 most glaring are not even up for re-election for almost 4 years.
They voted for the bill. Period.
I too see problems ahead, not necessarily the ones you referred to. Time will tell.
Celerity
(43,136 posts)To set up the likely soon massive issues for which it is DESPERATELY needs, all we need do is look at the 6-3 hard RW SCOTUS, which quite likely is going to the gut the current Voter Rights Act. Then, combine that with the insane hundreds of new voter suppression laws the Rethugs are pushing in at least 43 states.
Without a new Act, we may well be FUCKED in 2022 and so many elections after that.
The Rethugs WILL filibuster the new Act the instant it hits the Senate floor. It can not be included in the 2nd (and last) Reconciliation bill that will happen later on this summer or fall.
At that point, we have one hardcore option and then multiple softer ones.
The hardcore option is to bin the filibuster in toto. As it stands Manchin, Sinema and Feinstein (my 3 Senators I referred to above in my first reply) are hard, 'will not change their minds' NO's. There maybe more as well.
That leaves filibuster modification as our only out.
It will all come down to IF those 3 Senators agree to support one or more of these modifications (I have NO idea if Manchin, especially, will even cave a millimetre on any of these options) and if any of them actually works to get the Lewis VRA passed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/03/02/manchin-filibuster-never-sinema/
Instead of naming and shaming them, Democrats might consider looking at what Manchin and Sinema like about the filibuster. Sinema recently said, Retaining the legislative filibuster is not meant to impede the things we want to get done. Rather, its meant to protect what the Senate was designed to be. I believe the Senate has a responsibility to put politics aside and fully consider, debate, and reach compromise on legislative issues that will affect all Americans. Last year, Manchin said, The minority should have input thats the whole purpose for the Senate. If you basically do away with the filibuster altogether for legislation, you wont have the Senate. Youre a glorified House. And I will not do that. If you take their views at face value, the goal is to preserve some rights for the Senate minority, with the aim of fostering compromise. The key, then, is to find ways not to eliminate the filibuster on legislation but to reform it to fit that vision. Here are some options:
Make the minority do the work.
Currently, it takes 60 senators to reach cloture to end debate and move to a vote on final passage of a bill. The burden is on the majority, a consequence of filibuster reform in 1975, which moved the standard from two-thirds of senators present and voting to three-fifths of the entire Senate. Before that change, if the Senate went around-the-clock, filibustering senators would have to be present in force. If, for example, only 75 senators showed up for a cloture vote, 50 of them could invoke cloture and move to a final vote. After the reform, only a few senators in the minority needed to be present to a request for unanimous consent and to keep the majority from closing debate by forcing a quorum call. The around-the-clock approach riveted the public, putting a genuine spotlight on the issues. Without it, the minoritys delaying tactics go largely unnoticed, with little or no penalty for obstruction, and no requirement actually to debate the issue. One way to restore the filibusters original intent would be requiring at least two-fifths of the full Senate, or 40 senators, to keep debating instead requiring 60 to end debate. The burden would fall to the minority, whod have to be prepared for several votes, potentially over several days and nights, including weekends and all-night sessions, and if only once they couldnt muster 40 the equivalent of cloture debate would end, making way for a vote on final passage of the bill in question.
Go back to the present and voting standard.
A shift to three-fifths of the Senate present and voting would similarly require the minority to keep most of its members around the Senate when in session. If, for example, the issue in question were voting rights, a Senate deliberating on the floor, 24 hours a day for several days, would put a sharp spotlight on the issue, forcing Republicans to publicly justify opposition to legislation aimed at protecting the voting rights of minorities. Weekend Senate sessions would cause Republicans up for reelection in 2022 to remain in Washington instead of freeing them to go home to campaign. In a three-fifths present and voting scenario, if only 80 senators showed up, only 48 votes would be needed to get to cloture. Add to that a requirement that at all times, a member of the minority party would have to be on the floor, actually debating, and the burden would be even greater, while delivering what Manchin and Sinema say they want more debate.
Narrow the supermajority requirement.
Another option would be to follow in the direction of the 1975 reform, which reduced two-thirds (67 out of a full 100) to three-fifths (60 out of 100), and further reduce the threshold to 55 senators still a supermajority requirement, but a slimmer one. Democrats might have some ability to get five Republicans to support their desired outcomes on issues such as voting rights, universal background checks for gun purchases or a path to citizenship for Dreamers. A reduction to 55, if coupled with a present-and-voting standard would establish even more balance between majority and minority. In a 50-50 Senate, and with the GOP strategy clearly being united opposition to almost all Democratic priorities, Biden and Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) need the support of Manchin and Sinema on a daily basis. They wont be persuaded by pressure campaigns from progressive groups or from members of Congress. But they might consider reforms that weaken the power of filibusters and give Democrats more leverage to enact their policies, without pursuing the dead end of abolishing the rule altogether.
mcar
(42,278 posts)Gore1FL
(21,104 posts)Is there progressive pushback? He isn;t getting it from me. I know there is criticism for a couple of Democratic-lite Senators, but I haven't heard too much criticism concerning Biden.
Prof.Higgins
(194 posts)Congress members. Biden, Pilosi and Schumer are Homeric in passing this remarkable Rescue package, and Pres. Biden's just getting started with more of his Cabinet members beginning to make significant improvements.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,560 posts)At the very least, keep in mind that half a loaf is better than going hungry. And, you're getting much, much more than half a loaf, whether you choose to recognize that or not.
Cha
(296,876 posts)And I'm always seeing posts & tweets amazed at how Progressive he is.
But yes you're right.. he doesn't get hung up on what can't get done.. Pres Biden Moves it Forward to be in an excellent position to fight again!
Senator Brown gets it, too..
Link to tweet
PatSeg
(47,284 posts)Early on I told people that Joe would be far more progressive than they realized, plus HE knows how to actually get things done.
sheshe2
(83,661 posts)I agree.
PatSeg
(47,284 posts)when I was truly right about politics. I even was right about my first choice for VP. Doesn't happen too often, but it was worth the wait.
Bettie
(16,076 posts)not Biden.
I am pleasantly surprised by his actions since taking office.