The Squad was right to vote against infrastructure bill Part 3: Manchin a NO on BBB

[wellst0nev0ter]

The Build Back Better bill will not be passed by Christmas.

Discussions of the bill will NOT take place "over the days and weeks ahead" as the administration said.

The bill will not come on the floor "as early as possible."

Link to tweet

?s=20

The Squad has been pilloried on this board and elsewhere for not supporting the infrastructure bill and for aligning themselves with the goops. What their vote actually means is that they wanted to hold on to the BIF until they extract firm commitments on BBB from Manchinema.

And with todays new, on FAUX Nooze of all places, the Squad has been proven right once again.

As I have said repeatedly, Manchin was way too invested in BIF to abandon the bill: he even cut campaign commercials about what he was delivering for West Virginians.

As you know, BIF was Sinema's pet project to prove that the bipartisanship pony still works.

You use BIF as a bargaining chip. You don't fall for the bluff and give away the whole farm.

We should have treated Manchinema as single votes needed to pass the BBB: no more, no less. That means giving them one-fiftieth of the pound of flesh they are owed, then making them vote up or down on the bill they don't think is perfect but they are able to live with. You do NOT give them line-item veto power.

Manchin is not switching to the goop party, unless he wants to end his political career. He voted to convict the former guy twice, and that is a dealbreaker for the trumpanzees. His only political future is with the Democrats, and we should have made him fall in line.

When the Democratic leadership decided to split the bills, progressives said this would happen.

When Manchinema dragged out the process for months on end, progressives said this would happen.

When the Democratic leadership decided to pass BIF by itself, progressives said this would happen.

Maybe it is high time we start listening to progressives.

Some people here think it is savvy to break all the rules in dealmaking and leave trillions of dollars on the negotiating table. Those people are now deservingly and thoroughly discredited, and they should work toward doing everything to salvage Democrats' chances for the midterm instead of blaming progressives or the Squad for this mess.

[boston bean]

1. No. We would have been in same place but in it longer.

[FBaggins]

3. And without the BIF

It should be clear by this point that progressives were never going to pressure Manchin/Sinema to support BBB by holding BIF hostage.

The question now comes whether progressives would rather have 50% (or 60% or whatever) of BBB or nothing at all.

It’s beginning to sound like they would prefer nothing at all

[wellst0nev0ter]

6. Leaving trillions of dollars on the table is NOT a savvy move

No matter how one tries to dress it up as one.

[FBaggins]

10. Yet that's what you're advocating

I don’t get it

[wellst0nev0ter]

13. BIF would have passed anyway

Because Manchin had too much buy-in on it.

We must stop promulgating a false narrative.

[FBaggins]

21. Not as long as it was held hostage for the larger BBB

The “false narrative” is the claim that these two were ever going to be pressured in that way.

Pelosi made that clear

[wellst0nev0ter]

23. You put the bills on the floor, and force them to vote them down

Thus killing Biden's agenda and their pet projects.

They won't do it. All they have is their bluffs.

[FBaggins]

28. Interesting. That's exactly what the squad did

There’s zero evidence that Manchin was bluffing… and loads of proof that he wasn’t.

[wellst0nev0ter]

32. Yes, and I explained the Squad's vote in the OP

We can't forever hide behind the false narrative that paints the Squad's no votes.

[FBaggins]

45. Explained but not excused

The false narrative remains the BS belief that Manchin would have come around on things that he made clear months ago that he would not support.

The real error in the OP is the error the most progressive have been making since the elections. Margins this narrow mean that the Sanders and AOCs of the country won’t get everything they want. We can only get what the middle will support.

[wellst0nev0ter]

48. Then make him vote against both BIF and BBB

He was bluffing, just like he was bluffing on the Rescue Act.

You use the leverage you have against him, not hand out free concessions.

[FBaggins]

61. There's that same mistake again

They never had leverage.

In a 50/50 Senate (and virtually as tight House) - the leverage is always in the middle.

He won’t have any trouble voting against it.

[wellst0nev0ter]

63. The leverage is the vote

There was no upperdown vote on BBB

[FBaggins]

73. Didn't you claim just the opposite with Pelosi?

We kept hearing that there was no point in holding a vote if the progressives said that they wouldn’t support BIF. That it would just fail.

[BGBD]

77. Manchin represents a state

That Trump won +45%. Why do you think making him vote against Bidens Bill would hurt him?

[wellst0nev0ter]

78. Majority of West Virginians support BBB

It's basically Joe Manchin vs the World

Link to tweet

[BGBD]

80. No

If you believe those number I have a bridge to sell you.

WV had their chance to vote for Bidens agenda in 2020. They roundly rejected it. This poll is pure partisan fantasy.

[wellst0nev0ter]

81. Show me your numbers

Before you dismiss a poll.

[FBaggins]

85. How about a real poll first?

There are polls that don’t “push” labeling that sounds good. Find one that says “Do you support Biden’s Build Back Better bill?”. The numbers in WV are nothing close to what you pretend.

[wellst0nev0ter]

88. Then get the polls

I'll wait

[FBaggins]

91. No you won't

You’ll pretend that they don’t exist or aren’t legit

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2021/10/26/2060416/-A-sobering-poll-most-Arizonan-WV-voters-oppose-Build-Back-Better-bill

https://www.newsweek.com/joe-manchin-buoyed-polls-raises-new-concerns-about-build-back-better-act-1650003?amp=1

https://wvmetronews.com/2021/11/15/wv-voters-slam-biden-approve-of-justice-manchin-in-latest-mbe-research-poll/

“ Nearly 74 percent of voters also said Manchin should oppose the president’s Build Back Better plan.”

https://www.naw.org/news/survey-majority-of-west-virginians-oppose-bidens-tax-and-spend-bill/

[BGBD]

93. Ok

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/west-virginia/

You know, the day people actually voted for what they wanted.

Data for progress is pushing out the numbers they want. Remember when they said Sanders was going to win the Virginia primary or that Biden was going to win Texas? I do.

[wellst0nev0ter]

96. That's not a poll on BBB

try again.

Also Sherrod Brown and John Tester are senators from red states, and they are Democrats in good standing. Being from a trumpanzee state is no excuse to be trumpanzee-lite.

[radius777]

122. False, WV is only 'red' on social issues

and is basically a conservative Dem state that historically supported New Deal populism.

BBB is popular with voters, not so popular with donors.

[quakerboy]

108. There is no middle

[FBaggins]

113. That's nonsense... and just like Trump

The reality (which he had to learn as well) is that there's always a midpoint.

You can deny that they're "centrists" in some positive sense... but there's always a middle.

[quakerboy]

117. The nonsense

Is that we likely just lost our chance of retaining leadership of the government and returned it to the group that will, given half a chance, re-elect Donald Trump.

And that yall want to be ok with that in any way.

thats not the middle.

[CrackityJones75]

135. Just went round and round with someone else on this.

[TexasTowelie]

65. Why don't you contact Schumer about that?

Let's see if Schumer is willing to run with your plan and then we can see whether Manchin was bluffing.

[wellst0nev0ter]

66. Then I need your help

No maximum pressure if we don't stick together.

[TexasTowelie]

70. I'm not going to contact Senator Schumer

just so that you can have the satisfaction of coercing another Democratic senator because that has been your ultimate goal all along. You get to fight that battle without my assistance.

[wellst0nev0ter]

79. Then I will not hear another word about activism

From a person who refuses to take part in it.

[TexasTowelie]

94. ROTFL.

I used to stomp my feet and walk off when I disagreed with someone, but I was younger--much younger.

[wellst0nev0ter]

97. But you just said you won't contact a senator

Isn't that the very definition of "walking off"?

[TexasTowelie]

105. No, because I never joined you on your playing field.

I've also never contacted Manchin, Sinema or Schumer so how can I walk away from something that I never engaged in to begin with?

You are under the erroneous assumption that everyone is going to line up and support whatever you support. Reality doesn't support that assumption.

[PTWB]

25. Yes, it would have.

Splitting the bills removed our leverage. Moderates are trying to retcon history now but the murder of the BBB is on their hands alone.

It’s too bad that they betrayed Joe Biden. He invested so much into and worked so hard for the BBB, only to be betrayed by “moderates” in our own party.

[wellst0nev0ter]

29. It's not even a "progressives versus moderate" fight?

The entire Democratic caucus, progressives and moderates alike, were united behind Biden's economic agenda.

We were facing at least two radical holdouts, and astonishingly, the radical superminority was given free rein to dictate the fate of Biden's agenda.

And now a large number of DUers think this broken dynamic is somehow okay.

[PTWB]

33. Some people call them moderates.

Some people point out behavior that seems like right wing extremism.

I’ve engaged with people here that are so entrenched in their beliefs that they are bending over backward to try to blame this on progressives. The cognitive dissonances is incredible.

[Nixie]

7. Exactly. Without the BIF. The public fighting can be

corrected by Pelosi pushing the BIF through. There are real jobs in that, and implementation will start changing the narrative. Thanks to Pelosi.

Your post is excellent.

[qazplm135]

55. Lol

The BIF isn't changing squat.

Vast majority of the jobs won't even start before the election.

It's not going to address inflation or student loans or anything else.

Once again moderates think you can win elections by pissing on progressives. We're about to find out, again, just how stupid that strategy is.

[Nixie]

58. Wrong. The money allocated is to some major employers,

which is no LOL. They are good union jobs.

“Pissing on progressives” — some could say they piss on themselves. Sorry, I would never say that here…it was just a reversal of your unfortunate commentary.

[qazplm135]

64. Yeah no

Almost no projects have even been started yet so no most of the money hasn't been allocated and the results are seen over a decade not months.

The bottom line is a handful of conservative Dems on here like you wanted BBB to fail. Why y'all just won't admit it is beyond me.

[Nixie]

67. Uh yes. There are major employers in there.

With good Union jobs. In any event, Pelosi was right to stop the fighting and move on BIF.

[qazplm135]

68. Nice specificity there lol

Just repeating the same vague nothing isn't actually evidence.

But like I said, ya got what ya want, now watch what happens.

Spoiler alert it ain't gonna be good.

When the election is over make sure you come back and tell us all how the BIF helped k?

[Nixie]

69. You should be honest. You don't want specifics because it

it will ruin the chance to call people “conservatives.” Insulting is the real goal, not specifics, certainly.

I wouldn’t tell you who I know it’s already helped anyway.

[qazplm135]

90. Of course you won't

Lol

[TexasTowelie]

84. Deja vu.

I thought that we passed the point where progressives would threaten to take the football home if they didn't get their way. That plan didn't work out very well for Democrats in the 2016 general election.

[qazplm135]

95. Humans don't work that way

When you tell people to suck it up or go home, guess what, some of them go home.

Would think moderates would have learned from 2010 but guess not. Deja Vu indeed.

[TexasTowelie]

106. aka fair-weather Democrats.

Republicans manage to get their voters to the polls despite their differences. Fair weather Democrats pout because they aren't catered to. Deja vu indeed.

[qazplm135]

110. Welp pal

You need those folks to win so maybe instead of tossing bricks figure out how to retain them.
Nah why change anything right?

[TexasTowelie]

127. Similarly, progressives need moderates or they stand little chance of winning elections.

There have been plenty of bricks tossed by the Squad at the remainder of the Democratic Party, but why should any of them change, right?

The facts are that the members of the Squad are on record for voting for the BIF. They may attempt to explain away that vote, but in our culture of soundbites if a politician has to explain their vote as some type of moral stance then they have already lost the argument because voters will recognize the hypocrisy between their actions and their words in the excuses.

[qazplm135]

129. You mean like Manchin did today right?

Most progressives voted for the BIF.
The squad only voted no after it was going to pass, they didn't kill anything, Manchin did.

But play the both sides game even as you really only seem to care about one side game.

[TexasTowelie]

130. The Squad only looked after their self-interests

which isn't any different than Manchin looking after his self-interests. And the voters will remember that the Squad voted with the GOP on BIF. The Squad attempted to spin that vote away, but they were immediately identified as hypocrites when they pursued that route. The Squad lost the moral high ground along with the respect of many Democratic voters for pulling that stunt.

[qazplm135]

132. But not Manchin

Right?

[TexasTowelie]

133. You are welcome to have your opinion about Manchin.

While I retain my rights to form my own opinion about him. Whether I share that opinion with anybody else is also my right. Therefore, I'm not going to reply to your question and leave you in suspense since you believe that you are going to pin me on a gotcha question.

[qazplm135]

134. Lmao

What I thought.

[TexasTowelie]

136. LMAO because I think the same thing about you and your comments.

[empedocles]

15. Yes

[wellst0nev0ter]

5. A maximum pressure campaign on Manchinema would have gotten earlier passage

Just think, what if the entire Democratic caucus waged war against Manchinema instead of pillorying the squad? What if groups like the Democratic Majority for Israel bought ads in West Virginia painting Manchin as a radical minority holdout?

Instead, we treated Manchinema as kingmakers, and look at where we are.

[TexasTowelie]

22. There isn't any evidence that supports your speculation.

Last edited Sun Dec 19, 2021, 12:44 PM - Edit history (1)

There simply aren't enough votes in the Senate to pass the bill, the order or coupling of the bills wouldn't have gotten BBB passed.

As for your questions:

This is a site that supports Democrats. Advocating a position "declaring war" and the use of other strong-arm tactics on other Democrats is repulsive.

[wellst0nev0ter]

27. No other organization is this precious about keeping members in line

We have the tools to pressure holdouts, and we needed to use them.

[TexasTowelie]

52. You will need to take that up with EarlG. His site, his rules. nt

[FBaggins]

75. Pray tell... what are these "tools"??

[wellst0nev0ter]

76. This White House statement is a good start

If it were released several months ago

Link to tweet

[JohnSJ]

31. What does the "Democratic Majority for Israel" have to do with pressuring Manchin. There are about

2000 Jews who live in West Virgina, and that isn't the bulk of Manchin support in that state.

As far as the characterization of the "pillorying of the squad", I wouldn't be hurling stones from one group to another, because the "squad" did their share of "pillorying"

It is way past due that people accept the reality of a 50-50 Senate, and for those who think waging "war" against Manchin and Sinema would do the trick, I think are only fooling themselves.

This is the way things are now. We need at least a two seat majority in the Senate, and a majority in the House in the 2022 midterms to change that. The only thing "waging" war against Manchin and Sinema will do is make them dig their heals in more, and even more would NOT get accomplished

[wellst0nev0ter]

36. What does the number of Jews have to do

with a PAC supporting Israel? Jews are not a monolith who are wedded to Israel.

[JohnSJ]

41. You are the one who brought up using the "Democratic Majority for Israel", as a PAC against Manchin,

with the assumption they would have a big influence in West Virgina on Manchin.

It is the oil and gas interests that are Manchin's biggest doners

[wellst0nev0ter]

46. You use every PAC in the Democratic apparatus against Manchin

DMfI is very much part of the Democratic campaign apparatus

[JohnSJ]

51. Nothing stops those PACs from doing that now if they wanted to

[grantcart]

9. You are wasting your breath. They live in an alternate universe where

all of their strategies have worked perfectly.

[wellst0nev0ter]

11. In what universe

Is giving up concessions after concessions while getting nothing in return good strategy?

[FBaggins]

24. A universe where something gets passed

Today’s reporting says that Manchin brought the president a $1.8T bill that he would get behind.

In what universe is that $1.8T not better than $0?

[wellst0nev0ter]

26. It turns out he was lying and stalling

Nothing good comes out of taking Manchin at face value.

[FBaggins]

34. Prove it

Put that bill forward and see who votes for it.

We both know that Sanders/Jayapal would kill it - despite it likely being much close to the president’s “framework” than the current BBB is

[wellst0nev0ter]

44. There is no bill

Manchin killed it.

[FBaggins]

59. The progressives killed it

The President laid out a framework that he thought he could get past Manchin/Sinema… and progressives piled (significantly) on top of that (without any evidence that M/S would support any of it) - all while pretending they were making concessions.

[wellst0nev0ter]

62. Okay, so this means we're pin the blame on progressives

No matter what is happening before our own very eyes. Thanks for clarifying

[cilla4progress]

2. What a

Backstabber!

[Hotler]

8. Squad supporters have been pilloried on this board. nt

[JohnSJ]

12. and end up passing nothing, because that is what would have happened. I fail to understand why some

keep arguing the same frustrations over and over again. The rigidity of Manchin and Sinema on the filibuster, and how much they were willing go on the bills should not be a surprise at this stage. This is the reality of what we have.

Whether we like it or not, they will be defining the constraints of these bills.

However, the advantage we have at this time because we have the majority in the Senate, is that we have at least two years to make as many judicial appoints as become available, including the Supreme Court.

In the meantime the focus needs to be on winning at least a two seat majority in the Senate, and a majority in the House, which should help neutralize the issues we are having now

[wellst0nev0ter]

16. Manchin needed to pass BIF

He already cut campaign commercials on BIF before it was passed. Him voting him down would have been laughably insane.

We need to stop promulgating false narratives.

[JohnSJ]

37. There is no false narritive, this is what a 50-50 Senate is. Until we achieve at least a two seat

majority in the Senate, people can become agitated and frustrated, but it won't change a damn thing

[wellst0nev0ter]

38. This is the type of learned helplessness that we need to move on from

We saw this when we had a 59/60 vote majority in the Senate during Obama's first time

"Oh, if only we had a couple more or five votes, then we'd get around Lieberman"

We now control government and we should use the tools at our disposal NOW to implement Biden's agenda. Rolling over wishing for more Senate seats signals weakness.

[Me.]

42. Wanting * Needing More Senate Seats Is Not A Sign Of Weakness

it is a reality and necessity. And flooding Manchin's inbox with emails, some often insulting, is like a tik toc campaign and wasn't at all helpful.

[ismnotwasm]

47. Did we have the votes or not.

It’s basic addition, not “learned helplessness”

[wellst0nev0ter]

49. Yes we did

If we played our cards right. And BBB was a popular bill even in West Virginia.

Thinking there was no path forward on BBB is madness.

[FBaggins]

125. We didn't have the cards to play

And bluffing got us nowhere.

There is absolutely a path forward on BBB. It’s been there for months - and could have been predicted a year ago.

[JohnSJ]

50. I would argue you have not presented one viable option that would get Manchin or Sinema to change

their views.

and let me be frank, in 2016, if 1% of those self-identified progressives who refused to vote for Hillary in the general election, by either voting for Jill Stein, or not voting, instead voted for Hillary, we wouldn't be in the situation we are in now.

In those critical swing states Hillary lost by less than 1%, and Jill Stein received 1% of the vote in those swing states.

I knew it then, we would be paying for the consequences that for decades

[TheRickles]

83. It's been said before, but if Stein hadn't been on the ballot, those 1%ers would've stayed home.

Stein motivated them to get out and vote. Without her, they would've stayed home. They weren't automatic Hillary votes. But back to today's issues....

[Me.]

17. Totally Agree

[Me.]

14. Disagree

nothing still would've been nothing. in an atmosphere like this you have to get what you can get and the public infighting did nothing to help the situation. I don't feel an apology is due anyone.

[wellst0nev0ter]

18. Manchin needed to pass BIF

He cut campaign commercials promising BIF. There is no universe where he votes against BIF out of spite.

[TexasTowelie]

30. There is also no universe where Manchin will vote for the expanded programs in the BBB.

The attempts to coerce him to vote for the bills were destined for failure. I suspect that the high-pressure tactics may have solidified his opposition to the bill.

[wellst0nev0ter]

39. He voted for the Rescue bill, which is just handouts to THOSE people

He would have been in line for BBB if we had played our cards right.

Rolling over and giving Manchin unconditional concessions was NOT playing our cards right.

[TexasTowelie]

56. Who are you referring to with the emphasis on THOSE people?

If you are trying to set up some conflict, it would be nice to know are "OUR people" and who are "THOSE people."

[wellst0nev0ter]

57. Manchin has repeatedly explained who THOSE people were

I suggest those who are uninformed go listen to him.

[stopdiggin]

53. +1. pressure tactics quite evidently have NOT worked

but - "if we had just held his/their feet to the fire a little more .. " - "if we had just gotten serious!" - "if we weren't so WEAK!"

Groan. ----- ---- -----

[wellst0nev0ter]

60. When had we put Manchin's feet to the fire?

In any meaningful sense?

Enlighten me.

[stopdiggin]

82. the bills were de-coupled

because they were NOT going to pass (as a package). Full stop. Argue it until you're blue in the face. All amounts to "woulda', shoulda' coulda' .." And endless variations of the same. After a while that gets a great big ...
Groan .... ---- ----

appreciate that it's your OP. and I'm weighing in to say, "poppycock!"

[wellst0nev0ter]

87. You don't decouple them

You craft a full bill, give Manchinema their pound of flesh, then have them vote for the full bill up or down.

They are NOT going to tank Biden's full agenda and become pariahs in the Democratic party.

[stopdiggin]

104. "NOT going to tank Biden's full agenda and become pariahs .."

????? We talking about the same people?
I think the 'argue until you're blue in the face' thing is coming into play here ...

Your OP. And you have a nice one.

[FBaggins]

115. They were never coupled to begin with - that was always the mistaken fantasy

It was the constant attempt to couple them that caused all the nonsense.

[wellst0nev0ter]

116. Manchinema wanted them decoupled

You tell them no, vote on the bills and on Biden's agenda.

[FBaggins]

118. And they got that months ago

Both houses were unable to start the reconciliation process until their leadership agreed with the moderates that the two would not be coupled.

[wellst0nev0ter]

119. And handing them that concession got us where we are today

This strategy was broken from the start.

[FBaggins]

121. Laughable

Without that concession, there would be no bills at all.

[lame54]

72. A promise is not a vote...

Usually it's just hot air

He's bought and paid for

[Historic NY]

19. So now there is nothing....

making them vote for the price of insulin, student loans, child care, exposes them didn't the super brain of Chuck Schumer figure that out. Months wasted and the mid term clock is ticking

[WhiskeyGrinder]

20. K&R

[Fiendish Thingy]

35. Yup. Now, children will suffer and the planet will deteriorate until at least 2025

Or even longer if voting rights doesn’t pass and America enters an era of ongoing minority rule.

But hey, at least we get a bunch of new roads and bridges, amirite?

[Celerity]

40. Well, unless Manchin caves in, we shall see if the people who told me all we need to cruise to

an easy win in 2022 was to pass the $550 billion BIF (over 10 years, so $55 billion per year, so less than 1% of the monies spent in 2020, which was $6.1 trillion). $550 billion in new spend, the rest was simply renewals of pre existing highway/transportation programmes that were around under Obama and Trump.

They said that BBB was less important.

A couple even said we still win even if no voter rights and protection bills are passed. I find that to be so naïve, bordering on delusional, given what the Rethugs are doing in plain sight across the nation, at state and local levels.

I think that IF Manchin (and Sinema on the voter bills) blocks it all, winning in 2022 is a becoming a pipe dream, especially given the other factors aligned against us. That also puts 2024 in DIRE circumstances as well.

Over 90% (we will get $550 billion out of his original $6.1 trillion initial proposals) of Biden's agenda/framework for the 2 infrastructure bills new spend is now likely gone, done, dusted, binned, barring a Manchin cave in.

So many of the major programmes he (and pretty much nearly all other Dems, hundreds of them) campaigned on are now in mortal danger of being killed off and losing both chambers looms so large.

Thanks Manchin!

[DLevine]

43. Agreed. nt

[David__77]

54. I agree with their vote against BIF.

…

[calimary]

71. But there should be a cost, a price he has to pay.

How ‘bout any bill Manchin introduces automatically goes nowhere?

How ‘bout any bill that benefits West Virginia goes NOWHERE?

Hell, Democrats aren’t gonna carry West Virginia anyway, and not for a long time to come. They’re an avowed red state. So, I’d say write ‘em off and work with those who are more cooperative and more likely to be pulling in the same direction you are? Cuz THEIR people need help, too!

Manchin’s officially a waste of time at this point. And I hate seeing good effort wasted on the bad. Like the proverbial pearls before swine.

[BannonsLiver]

74. This is quite a pant load.

[oldsoftie]

86. No it WAS the wrong move. We now have an infrastructure bill.

This "all or nothing" BS helps nothing and no one.
Biden & Harris can point to the many much needed projects that will now be funded as a success. Some that may get started before the next election.
The others can go home and whine that they didnt get EVERYTHING they wanted.

[wellst0nev0ter]

89. BIF did not improve Biden's approval ratings at all

The idea that Democrats can successfully campaign on BIF is a myth that continues to prove itself with each passing day, especially with the omicron surge.

[oldsoftie]

98. Well, exploding the debt is another bad move.

He CAN campaign on that bill, but he's also going to have to deal with sky high gas prices & inflation. Those 2 problems still around at the election and the BBB wouldnt matter either.

[wellst0nev0ter]

99. BBB was fully paid for

The idea that BBB will add to the debt or raise inflation is a false, rightwing narrative.

[oldsoftie]

137. Not a "right wing narrative", just a fact you dont like. CBO says it adds 160 billion.

Which means it would likely be far more than that in the end.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/11/18/bidens-build-back-better-bill-would-add-deficit-cbo-estimate-says/6360581001/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/12/01/yellens-claim-that-cbo-found-biden-plan-is-fully-paid/


Claims that the IRS is suddenly going to get a lot more efficient at collecting taxes will fall short it always does. Savings & new revenue estimates are always over estimated as well. All of which will make it cost even more.

The infrastructure bill is also far more popular across the board. Passing it was the right thing to do

[TexasTowelie]

101. I suspect that BIF and BBB will only have a small impact on 2022 voters.

The availability of jobs along with the price of gasoline and groceries will have a greater influence on voters than the scuttling of the BBB.

[wellst0nev0ter]

103. You pass Biden's agenda to excite and turn out Dem midterm voters

Killing BBB demoralizes the base and hands the election to the goops.

[TexasTowelie]

107. Once again, I consider the conclusion that you reached to be erroneous and actually it is also

insulting the intelligence of voters. It's no wonder progressive candidates can only win in select niche districts.

[wellst0nev0ter]

109. Here are the members of the Progressive Caucus

Which includes members such as Katie Porter who won in swing districts

https://progressives.house.gov/caucus-members

If we're going to argue, let's argue based on facts, okay?

[TexasTowelie]

120. Yes, let's argue facts.

Fact 1: Katie Porter voted yes on BIF.

Fact 2: You decided to move the goalposts by conflating the Squad with the remainder of the Progressive caucus that also voted yes on BIF with the exception of the Squad and two other congressman.

Fact 3: You can't stay on the topic on your own OP.

And since you decided to cherry-pick one congressman, I wonder if Katie Porter would have won her election if she had identified herself as either a member of the Squad or as a Justice Democrat. Porter's star waned earlier this year when she tried to buck Democratic rules and traditions to obtain select committee positions and her influence was diminished when she lost her seat on the Financial Services Committee.

[wellst0nev0ter]

123. Your post in question said "progressive candidate"

Not "the Squad."

Words mean things, and it would be helpful if arguments are anchored to specific terms.

[TexasTowelie]

126. You're correct, I shouldn't have interchanged the Squad with progressives.

With that correction, I'll also the remainder of post #107 to read:

It's no wonder the Squad and other Justice Democrat candidates can only win in select niche districts.

However, that distinction doesn't alter any of the facts that I presented in post #120.

[pecosbob]

92. Joe Mansion turns out to be a water boy for the wealthy...what a surprise, not.

He's being disingenuous when he cites deficits worries...in other words, lying and obfuscating.

[mathematic]

100. The squad is either gets BBB or gets to be right. What clever political maneuvering.

Or maybe they're just a bunch of people that voted against investing in america.

They were wrong to vote against the infrastructure bill, they were wrong to think they had leverage against manchin, they were wrong to try to use an infrastructure spending bill (which they've all identified as high priorities in the past) as leverage.

The squad is not popular. We will never live in a country designed by the squad. Why is this so hard to understand?

[TexasTowelie]

111. +1

Yes, the Squad attempted to force an all-or-nothing situation and found out that they had far less power than they envisioned. Thank goodness that more reasonable power brokers were able to get the BIF passed into law.

The Squad may be popular in certain niche districts, but they would never stand a chance of getting elected in about 95% of the country.

[JohnSJ]

112. +++. Should have learned that in 2000, and because we didn't, 2016 changed the whole dynamic

[Traildogbob]

102. Lots of points made on this.

It is a mess. I see no way out except elections, which are going to be a disaster with GQP control state by state. Just my thought but, I think voting laws HAS to be priority, and take house and senate bigly. We only have January until late summer to fix this mess. This on again off again BBB game is discouraging so many, turnout may be pitiful. Machin and Sinema need to become irrelevant. Not sure I can take the smiling positive “it will get passed” hallway interviews anymore, then have Manchin just scoot over to FOX from his Yacht to gloat.

[JohnSJ]

114. Yes, and the only way to make them irrelevant is to gain at least a two seat majority in the Senate

The only way that will happen is if Democrats unify and get out and vote Democratic

[radius777]

124. Manchin is the hero of a segment of white moderates

the ones who fear 'too much spending' when it's on the working class, women, PoC etc. You never heard these people say one peep about the NeoCons' oil wars, spending on the MIC, Trumps 3T tax cuts for the rich etc.

MLK long ago identified the white moderate as the great 'stumbling block' in the stride towards freedom, devoted more to 'order than to justice'.

The Squad are disliked by this same segment for being the opposite, for believing in justice before order, and are viewed as uppity as a result.

[TexasTowelie]

128. So the Squad is disliked because of their own actions?

Yes, the voters will look at their no votes on BIF. No need to shift the blame to white moderates as scapegoats though.

[oldsoftie]

138. Oh, there's always a reason to somehow find a racial aspect for everything these days.

And I dont know why your other points on this thread are so hard for some to grasp.

[demmiblue]

131. True. n/t