Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: No Josh, you gonna have to run with that mutherfucker. [View all]quakerboy
(14,453 posts)60. He wouldnt have voted for it, if that were the case
Everything after the vote is posturing and publicity, meaning absolutely nothing.
And he really doesnt need to worry. Trump has his supersized supression force and the concentration camps funded, Voters who might go the wrong way can now be handled.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
64 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Wow that is some bullshit campaign. He is trying to play both sides, ineffectively.
Bev54
Tuesday
#12
No. Trying to do a very narrow rescission bill is not the same as going back ex post facto and saying he wants his Yea
Celerity
Tuesday
#46
No it is not at all. IF Hawley could (he cannot) somehow go back and ex post facto switch from Yea to Nay on the BBB,
Celerity
Wednesday
#52
That is not germane to my narrowly-focused replies. (BTW, I agree with your sentiment, it IS fair to put the blame
Celerity
Wednesday
#55
How about this - Trump and GOP gets there tax cuts, Hawley and maybe a Dem co-sponsor
walkingman
Wednesday
#48
Hawley humiliates the sane Missourians, (Democrats,) every time he opens his mouth or posts.
HeartsCanHope
Wednesday
#63