mtutiger

Totally, I get it.

As much as we laugh about this stuff as well, it's pretty frustrating to know that Ukrainians are currently suffering real world consequences while these guys are busy with their performative dumb***ery.

It later came out that Scalise will not be coming back tomorrow.... we'll see if Mike Johnson notices lol

Al Green being wheeled in no doubt caused this, they assumed he wouldn't be there... It's almost an intelligence failure in that you'd expect them to at least have some sources within the opposing party to know something like that was a possibility

Uhh lol

Yep, got it...

Without a doubt, the most useless, most ineffective Congress of my lifetime...

215-215... the Dems had someone show up who wasn't expected to be there. Just an incredible failure by House Leadership to do basic math lol Edit: you're correct, official tally 214-216

How long until Trump tanks this one?

Just to take a step back, this is what people do not understand about how legislating works in the House of Representatives.... bills don't just see the floor because they are popular, a Speaker of the House has enormous discretion as to what sees or doesn't see the floor. Theoretically, you could have a bill that has the support of 70-80%+ of the House, but if the Speaker doesn't support it and doesn't want it to get a vote, he or she has the discretion not to bring that bill to a vote. There are mechanisms to get around that (such as a discharge petition), but the power dynamics of going around a Speaker don't really lend itself to that tool being used much.

I'd love to see all of these bills as standalone bills, and honestly they probably would all pass if they were standalone bills. But the Speaker of the House holds discretion over what bills are brought up for consideration in that body, and outside of maybe Israel funding, they wouldn't see the light of day in that body. That's part of how they got grouped together in the first place: the compromise was supposed to be Ukraine Funding for Border Security. The House reneged on their part.

Meanwhile, another boffo day for the the 118th Congress. Sam Rayburn has nothing on these clowns lol

100%. For the campaigns part, I think they are giving him opportunities to succeed in that respect (recent Duluth/Superior, Metro Detroit, Las Vegas) appearances.... I just think they need to mix in a few more speeches / higher profile events. Particularly because it is really hard to break through the other noise that exists out there in smaller settings. Another example I think about (and was the leading indicator to me that he was going to get the UAW endorsement) was his appearance in Belvidere, IL late last year... it was kinda the perfect venue and setting for him, Shawn Fain and the workers at the Stellantis plant (which will no longer be shuttered due to UAW negotiations) gave him a pretty enthusiastic reception. But despite the fact that it probably earned him a decent amount of media coverage in the Chicagoland and SE Wisconsin media markets, it just completely fell on deaf ears nationally. I remember Nate Silver even musing about how you never see Biden out campaigning literally one day after said event. As far as his gaffes and age are concerned, he is who he is at this point and they need to just embrace it as opposed to hiding from it. And I suspect that's more on the campaign being risk averse versus Biden himself as the candidate.

Boom

I think they have been doing a better job lately of getting Biden out in smaller settings and connecting with voters (his recent appearance in Duluth/Superior being the best example), but retail politics isn't good enough in today's day and age for sure.... The decision not to do the Super Bowl interview is puzzling in that respect... I don't think it matters much because the amount of people who will actually be watching the pregame is overblown anyway, but having the video clip that people can watch later matters as well. Part of it is maybe age, but in general I think he's just getting bad advice from his campaign. Even before Biden became President and started showing age, he was always gaffe prone. Just let him doing his thing and move on... particularly when your opponent is Donald Trump lol

Goodness, even Fox and Friends lol

Hasn't been talked about last night given that James Lankford has the most painful role in all of this, but one other casualty to all of this last night was Kyrsten Sinema... her actions over the past few years were likely based on an incorrect read of the electorate. A lot of effort that amounts to very little. As a result, one imagines she's 100% not running for reelection now.

My guess is Trump would debate, but does not want to debate under the auspices of the Commission on Presidential Debates. Likely at forums that are more favorable to him (ie. Moderated by by friendlies) Biden would also debate but would not debate outside the auspices of the Commission on Presidential Debates. Precedent would lie with staying with CPD, but my guess is that Trump is looking for a way to duck debates in that forum that involves shifting blame to Biden for ducking.

Good Lord

I dont think that the Dems can win immigration as an issue outright, but they need to at least draw closer or use the issue to speak to Trump/GOP's competence in governing. Just pure politics, there's a pretty easy story to tell here and they need to run it to ground. To that end, said this in another thread, but the campaign really needs to take a page from Truman and make this Congress a foil. Particularly the House. The reality is this whole incident speaks volumes in their inability to govern and voters need to hear about it

This outcome was probably expected on their part, and probably will have some mild benefit for Biden in the sense that it will give him something to blunt some of the attacks on the issue IMO. (IE. We supported this bill that even the Border Patrol Union supported, but they arent interested in fixing the border) This whole exercise has been very enlightening though. On a number of levels. The age of McConnell is coming to an end, the inmates now run the asylum

And it's dead.

Kinda go back to what I said earlier... I dont think that the conservative movement really has consensus on what the problem at the border even is to begin with. Some want the system to be sane and rational, but some just want to end *all* asylum and impose harsh limits on immigration altogether. People of sound mind can disagree with the former, but it's hard to talk rationally with folks who believe the latter. And unfortunately, they are the majority view in the GOP these days if I had to guess.

I mostly just avoid talking politics and just listen most of the time anymore... touching on Chas' point, I can fake it decently when I hear something cringy, but it takes practice. And a level of grace that I don't think everyone can muster, especially in this day and age and also given that I'm not a member of a disadvantaged group. Overall, I've just come to the conclusion that while I have strong opinions (just as strong as they have always been even), I just don't have the time to dedicate to the outrage or getting into fights with people on this stuff. It's not worth the time or the energy. Happy to come here and let this be my outlet for that sort of stuff.