So much to comment upon this TGIF! Let me begin with Biden's Build Back Better Botch.
Over at the "Commentary" podcast, the gang has offered what I think is a correct diagnosis of this Democratic debacle. They point out that right from the beginning, the messaging was all about the money: six trillion or 4.5 trillion or 3.8 trillion or 1.…
So much to comment upon this TGIF! Let me begin with Biden's Build Back Better Botch.
Over at the "Commentary" podcast, the gang has offered what I think is a correct diagnosis of this Democratic debacle. They point out that right from the beginning, the messaging was all about the money: six trillion or 4.5 trillion or 3.8 trillion or 1.5 trillion $$$ or whatever. What the bill actually contained seemed of decidedly secondary importance, even to its proponents. The Biden Administration and congressional Democrats gave the impression that they were only interested in spending as much money as possible, and had no coherent plan.
Bernie Sanders runs around insisting that BBB is "wildly popular" but the truth is that by and large people don't know what's in the bill. Nor are they on board with the idea that spending a boatload of billions and trillions will address the issues that actually concern them. So with miniscule congressional majorities and no real popular support, BBB is going nowhere. Hence the ludicrously transparent pivot to "voting rights."
The problem is compounded by the incoherence of Biden himself. If the President can't provide an understandable explanation of his own signature legislation—what chance has it got?
I 100% agree - the Democrats have more or less accepted that they will get swept in the midterms, meaning Biden will be a lame duck president for the back half of his first term.
Looking back to Obama, he was also a lame duck from 2008-2010, but managed to get reelected largely by coasting on the tailwind generated by Obamacare. The Democratic thinking is that if they can pass a big enough, way over the top bill while they hold a legislative majority, then they can ride it through to 2024.
Thus, the bloated nature of BBB is the point; the higher the price tag, the more Democrats can claim they accomplished in Biden's first term. Where all that money actually goes is an afterthought at best.
Miles... "the trailwind by BO", brings to mind the reason to pass that Bill, to cover the 30 million without Insurance. And now what do we have? ha...30 million US people without insurance...hello daylight.
I will never understand that. Most debates are stalemates. Romney dominated that debate. Then he stopped campaigning and stopped attacking. Maybe he didn't really want to be POTUS.
Did McCain ever start? To me, he seemed to be the "Being There" candidate.
I hadn't heard the "stand in the way of history" thing. That is crazy - history doesn't need anyone doing anything for it...so to speak...but it is Nicole Wallace, so that explains a lot...
That is one of the saddest developments of our era: we are so consumed with "firsts"; as if making history is more important than making good. True history only happens organically. Manufactured history fails (see: Obama years). At some point, there will be no more "natural" firsts and scientists will have to genetically engineer an egg to produce a "trans-trans-LGBTQ-multi ethnic but mainly black-parapalegic-red haired-..." in order to "make history". But then the celebratory signs will be too big for an individual to hold up...
When politicians appeal to history—grab your wallet!
"The right side of history" is a phrase beloved of politicians and activists who don't really believe in God but seek some sort of moral imprimatur for their preferred policies. Well, history doesn't take sides. How could it? History is not an entity. Stuff just happens and no moral arc is bent. Sometimes what happens is good: the abolition of American slavery or the invention of the Cosmopolitan. (I mean the cocktail.) Other times what happens is bad: the Great War or the presidency of Joe Biden. History exhibits no record of progress, though Americans, a fortunate people, can be forgiven for entertaining that illusion. Does the history of the late, unlamented twentieth century validate some principle of progress? Hardly.
very similar to what Lincoln said - and it is one of my favorite quotes: My concern is not about whether or not God is on our side. My concern is whether or not we are on God's side."
He also weaponized the IRS, which greatly hamstrung conservative nonprofits who otherwise would've been hammering him for the year up to the 2012 election. He also benefited from pathetic debate performances by the milquetoast Pierre Delecto. He also benefited from Chris Christie kissing his ring after Sandy.
Obama lost TWO midterms because of ACA. And didn't just lose them; lost them in historic, never-before-seen fashion. THAT is not "par for the course" midterm losses, as miles would have us believe.
I'd say losing the midterms is par for the course; what ACA accomplished politically is it gave Obama enough mileage to avoid being written off as a lame duck president who got nothing done.
Biden is trying to replicate that winning formula, knowing he will soon also be a lame duck Commander in Chief. I liked ACA; I'm not at all a fan of BBB.
41 seats vs 63 seats. Not even close AND one involved the leader of the party being a messiah who just made healthcare free vs the main guy being tried for treason as a Russian spy.
Running on the treason platform provided substantially better results than running on ACA.
Yes, because past midterm losses resulted from the same kind of presidential treatment that Trump got from the near-entirety of the media and the Left, starting even BEFORE he took office.
The Sock-Puppet-in-Chief President couldn't provide an understandable explanation of what he had for breakfast, much less explain his own signature legislation. I think if most people could see where the money really goes, we would be rightfully disgusted by what his manipulators are proposing. I'm not saying we can't justify SOME spending, but these bloated trillions $$$$ bills just scream wasteful at a time when our lovely govt is hobbling its own citizens with economic hardship and destroying average businesses with draconian measures.
So much to comment upon this TGIF! Let me begin with Biden's Build Back Better Botch.
Over at the "Commentary" podcast, the gang has offered what I think is a correct diagnosis of this Democratic debacle. They point out that right from the beginning, the messaging was all about the money: six trillion or 4.5 trillion or 3.8 trillion or 1.5 trillion $$$ or whatever. What the bill actually contained seemed of decidedly secondary importance, even to its proponents. The Biden Administration and congressional Democrats gave the impression that they were only interested in spending as much money as possible, and had no coherent plan.
Bernie Sanders runs around insisting that BBB is "wildly popular" but the truth is that by and large people don't know what's in the bill. Nor are they on board with the idea that spending a boatload of billions and trillions will address the issues that actually concern them. So with miniscule congressional majorities and no real popular support, BBB is going nowhere. Hence the ludicrously transparent pivot to "voting rights."
The problem is compounded by the incoherence of Biden himself. If the President can't provide an understandable explanation of his own signature legislation—what chance has it got?
Save America, Kill the Bill
I 100% agree - the Democrats have more or less accepted that they will get swept in the midterms, meaning Biden will be a lame duck president for the back half of his first term.
Looking back to Obama, he was also a lame duck from 2008-2010, but managed to get reelected largely by coasting on the tailwind generated by Obamacare. The Democratic thinking is that if they can pass a big enough, way over the top bill while they hold a legislative majority, then they can ride it through to 2024.
Thus, the bloated nature of BBB is the point; the higher the price tag, the more Democrats can claim they accomplished in Biden's first term. Where all that money actually goes is an afterthought at best.
Miles... "the trailwind by BO", brings to mind the reason to pass that Bill, to cover the 30 million without Insurance. And now what do we have? ha...30 million US people without insurance...hello daylight.
They lost the midterms because of ACA. It was not a tailwind. He won twice because he’s Obama.
who ran against Romney, a miler who stopped running at 3/4 of a mile...
Yeah, maybe Pierre Delecto was a hockey team that didn't come out of the locker room after the first period.
(IIRC, he had an excellent first debate, then mailed it in in the next two.)
I will never understand that. Most debates are stalemates. Romney dominated that debate. Then he stopped campaigning and stopped attacking. Maybe he didn't really want to be POTUS.
I believe it was John McCain who backed off at the end because he didn’t want to stand in the way of history.
He did this on the advice of Nicole Wallace. So yeah.
Did McCain ever start? To me, he seemed to be the "Being There" candidate.
I hadn't heard the "stand in the way of history" thing. That is crazy - history doesn't need anyone doing anything for it...so to speak...but it is Nicole Wallace, so that explains a lot...
That is one of the saddest developments of our era: we are so consumed with "firsts"; as if making history is more important than making good. True history only happens organically. Manufactured history fails (see: Obama years). At some point, there will be no more "natural" firsts and scientists will have to genetically engineer an egg to produce a "trans-trans-LGBTQ-multi ethnic but mainly black-parapalegic-red haired-..." in order to "make history". But then the celebratory signs will be too big for an individual to hold up...
When politicians appeal to history—grab your wallet!
"The right side of history" is a phrase beloved of politicians and activists who don't really believe in God but seek some sort of moral imprimatur for their preferred policies. Well, history doesn't take sides. How could it? History is not an entity. Stuff just happens and no moral arc is bent. Sometimes what happens is good: the abolition of American slavery or the invention of the Cosmopolitan. (I mean the cocktail.) Other times what happens is bad: the Great War or the presidency of Joe Biden. History exhibits no record of progress, though Americans, a fortunate people, can be forgiven for entertaining that illusion. Does the history of the late, unlamented twentieth century validate some principle of progress? Hardly.
very similar to what Lincoln said - and it is one of my favorite quotes: My concern is not about whether or not God is on our side. My concern is whether or not we are on God's side."
He also weaponized the IRS, which greatly hamstrung conservative nonprofits who otherwise would've been hammering him for the year up to the 2012 election. He also benefited from pathetic debate performances by the milquetoast Pierre Delecto. He also benefited from Chris Christie kissing his ring after Sandy.
Obama lost TWO midterms because of ACA. And didn't just lose them; lost them in historic, never-before-seen fashion. THAT is not "par for the course" midterm losses, as miles would have us believe.
I'd say losing the midterms is par for the course; what ACA accomplished politically is it gave Obama enough mileage to avoid being written off as a lame duck president who got nothing done.
Biden is trying to replicate that winning formula, knowing he will soon also be a lame duck Commander in Chief. I liked ACA; I'm not at all a fan of BBB.
I’ve never heard anyone claim that the 2010 midterms were par for the course.
The winning formula for 2012 was Obama.
Not that different from the 2018 midterms, or what's about to happen in the 2022 midterms.
41 seats vs 63 seats. Not even close AND one involved the leader of the party being a messiah who just made healthcare free vs the main guy being tried for treason as a Russian spy.
Running on the treason platform provided substantially better results than running on ACA.
Yes, because past midterm losses resulted from the same kind of presidential treatment that Trump got from the near-entirety of the media and the Left, starting even BEFORE he took office.
No it’s the Big Bolshevik Boondoggle™️
So smart to trademark that....you just never know!
The Sock-Puppet-in-Chief President couldn't provide an understandable explanation of what he had for breakfast, much less explain his own signature legislation. I think if most people could see where the money really goes, we would be rightfully disgusted by what his manipulators are proposing. I'm not saying we can't justify SOME spending, but these bloated trillions $$$$ bills just scream wasteful at a time when our lovely govt is hobbling its own citizens with economic hardship and destroying average businesses with draconian measures.