Octopus Overlords

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 7:29 pm
I can't read that post, I guess I need to be following that person.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 8:29 pm https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1663 ... 72932.html

Massive legislative accomplishments greater than those of any president since LBJ with the American Rescue Plan, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act...

He has done all this while facing the greatest national security challenges the US has faced in decades in Ukraine, with the rise of China and with the climate crisis. In each case, his response has been historic and constructive. NATO is now stronger (and larger) than ever.

No president in his first two and a half years has created more jobs, lifted more people out of poverty, provided more investment in the jobs of tomorrow.

He has completely rethought US econ policy to focus on the real economy & real people and not just on the needs of the few.

Recent data has shown conclusively that under his leadership, the US has had the fastest recovery from the COVID crisis of any major economy.

At the same time, the president has taken a strong stand against the greatest security threat we face--domestic extremism.

The majority of Americans can see what he has done and is doing and stands for.

waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 9:38 pmIf people won’t vote for third parties then the malaise will continue because the two major parties have no reason to change.

malchior wrote:

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 8:29 pm https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1663 ... 72932.html

Well that spiel is at best a liberal fantasy report card and at worst has some...uh...deeply intellectually dishonest content.

Massive legislative accomplishments greater than those of any president since LBJ with the American Rescue Plan, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act...

How are these accomplishments being measured? in dollars? At the very least this is taking credit without knowing the results. Some of it indeed was directionally the right direction but it's too early to know if it'll survive or pan out in the end.

He has done all this while facing the greatest national security challenges the US has faced in decades in Ukraine, with the rise of China and with the climate crisis. In each case, his response has been historic and constructive. NATO is now stronger (and larger) than ever.

Almost every President since NATO was formed could claim this. Even Trump despite trying to damage it presided over expansion of NATO. But sure whatever.

No president in his first two and a half years has created more jobs, lifted more people out of poverty, provided more investment in the jobs of tomorrow.

This is the most deeply dishonest comment of them all. The total number of jobs finally returned to pre-pandemic levels in Q1 of 2023. This is much like when Republicans slammed Obama and Biden for gas prices that happened to be low at one point in Bush or Trump's administration because of economic turmoil. This takes credit for a recovery from historical unemployment caused by the pandemic. It's bullshit.

He has completely rethought US econ policy to focus on the real economy & real people and not just on the needs of the few.

He completely rethought US econ policy? Ok sure.

Recent data has shown conclusively that under his leadership, the US has had the fastest recovery from the COVID crisis of any major economy.

Finally something that's actually true. We did better than any of our peers and they did it by helping close output gaps but that effort goes back to Trump as well. There was great continuity there that we should recognize.

At the same time, the president has taken a strong stand against the greatest security threat we face--domestic extremism.

Oh really? I'd love to hear some specifics on this one beyond the strategy they published in 2021 that pretty much has had zero impact on law enforcement priorities in the face of growth of domestic extremism.

The majority of Americans can see what he has done and is doing and stands for.

And they disapprove of it. I'm again going to say it's hardly a cult but Democrats are living in a fantasy world if they read this and nod along.

“[O]ne of the things that I hear some of you guys saying is, ‘Why doesn’t Biden say what a good deal it is?’” President Joe Biden said to reporters yesterday afternoon before leaving the White House on the Marine One helicopter. “Why would Biden say what a good deal it is before the vote? You think that’s going to help me get it passed? No. That’s why you guys don’t bargain very well.”

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 10:02 pmRather conveniently skipping my post(s) written for you here.... in favor of stuff I didn't even bring up.

Apollo wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 11:19 pmBiden's biggest problem is that both the Far Left and the Far Right hate his guts and they're the ones who scream the loudest. Then the General Public, which barely pays attention, hears all the ruckus and thinks "This guy must be a real Loser. Everybody hates him!"

Kraken wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 11:32 pm This is the lede for Heather Cox Richardson's letter today:

“[O]ne of the things that I hear some of you guys saying is, ‘Why doesn’t Biden say what a good deal it is?’” President Joe Biden said to reporters yesterday afternoon before leaving the White House on the Marine One helicopter. “Why would Biden say what a good deal it is before the vote? You think that’s going to help me get it passed? No. That’s why you guys don’t bargain very well.”

Apollo wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 11:19 pm
Biden's biggest problem is that both the Far Left and the Far Right hate his guts and they're the ones who scream the loudest.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:28 am “US debt ceiling: Republican hard-right vows to sink deal hours before vote expected”

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 11:06 am

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:28 am “US debt ceiling: Republican hard-right vows to sink deal hours before vote expected”

One hopes voters are paying attention, because this is exactly the kind of bluster most say they don't want.

malchior wrote:

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 10:02 pmRather conveniently skipping my post(s) written for you here.... in favor of stuff I didn't even bring up.

That post wasn't a response to yours but you did pick up the spirit of why I ignored it. If you truly believe he helped avoid a war in Poland (beyond preposterous) or Taiwan (a touch less preposterous but still not especially reality based) then I felt like letting it go was the best course but let's say I agree to disagree.

Apollo wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 11:19 pmBiden's biggest problem is that both the Far Left and the Far Right hate his guts and they're the ones who scream the loudest. Then the General Public, which barely pays attention, hears all the ruckus and thinks "This guy must be a real Loser. Everybody hates him!"

People says this often but I posted actual poll data showing that people disapprove his Presidency by a large margin. Similar numbers to Trump. People have to realize that our government in its wild gyrations often produces results that the majority of Americans dislike. And that's not about far left or far right.

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 11:38 am

malchior wrote:

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 10:02 pmRather conveniently skipping my post(s) written for you here.... in favor of stuff I didn't even bring up.

That post wasn't a response to yours but you did pick up the spirit of why I ignored it. If you truly believe he helped avoid a war in Poland (beyond preposterous) or Taiwan (a touch less preposterous but still not especially reality based) then I felt like letting it go was the best course but let's say I agree to disagree.

Apollo wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 11:19 pmBiden's biggest problem is that both the Far Left and the Far Right hate his guts and they're the ones who scream the loudest. Then the General Public, which barely pays attention, hears all the ruckus and thinks "This guy must be a real Loser. Everybody hates him!"

People says this often but I posted actual poll data showing that people disapprove his Presidency by a large margin. Similar numbers to Trump. People have to realize that our government in its wild gyrations often produces results that the majority of Americans dislike. And that's not about far left or far right.

I think that if Ukraine fell in days, then Putin would have taken Belarus, Georgia, Crimea and the rest of ukraine with zero consequences, and NATO would still not be united, even with 150k Russian soldiers on the polish border backed up by that 20+ mile line of tanks we saw heading for Kyiv in the first days.

I also think that Putin would still have that massive overconfidence in his military's ability.

Why do you think he would stop, given the above? After all, we would already have ignored our treaty obligations to Ukraine (again, after Crimea).

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:00 pm Whelp...

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 2:17 pm All of those apply to the Ukraine invasion as well.

Part of Ukraine's agreement to give up their Nukes after the Soviet break-up was an agreement to protect Ukraine. Remember that they would have had the 3rd largest nuclear stockpile in the world at the time.

Did we when Russia invaded Crimea? Nope.

Heck, per the article, we even TOLD Putin what he was risking to go into Ukraine. He did it anyways, and it hasn't gone nuclear - not even the "tactical" nukes a LOT of people seem to think would be ok (a lot of insane people, IMHO).

If Biden and the West hadn't contested (stopped? TBD) him in the rest of Ukraine, I see no reason he wouldn't have kept going, *especially* if China invaded Taiwan and we were pre-occupied there, or even half-assing it.

Sure, everyone would be trying to prevent it from going nuclear, and maybe they would be successful, but IMHO, a 2 front war in Europe and SE Asia is a World War, even if it's non-nuclear.

Octavious wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:13 pm What a bag of dicks. Seriously can't see how bad it would be to not sign on? Whatever.

malchior wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:21 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:13 pm What a bag of dicks. Seriously can't see how bad it would be to not sign on? Whatever.

FWIW Sanders and Warren saying this leads me to believe the votes are there and they are just making noise because it is safe to.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:32 pm

malchior wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:21 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:13 pm What a bag of dicks. Seriously can't see how bad it would be to not sign on? Whatever.

FWIW Sanders and Warren saying this leads me to believe the votes are there and they are just making noise because it is safe to.

Seems to me that there are both good substantive reasons (because this is establishing the precedent of paying a ransom) and good political reasons (because it probably helps the bill pass more than them voting for it) for them to do this, so this doesn't seem terribly surprising.

waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 6:59 pm What concerns me is this debacle clearly shows there is no one actually running the country. I’m sure they claim they are; but in my opinion this country has always been its strongest when there is bipartisan consensus on the way forward.

Right now we can’t even agree on what reality we live in and representatives and former presidents are openly defying democracy and lauding foreign dictators like Putin.

Apollo wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:51 pm

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:32 pm

malchior wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:21 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 4:13 pm What a bag of dicks. Seriously can't see how bad it would be to not sign on? Whatever.

FWIW Sanders and Warren saying this leads me to believe the votes are there and they are just making noise because it is safe to.

Seems to me that there are both good substantive reasons (because this is establishing the precedent of paying a ransom) and good political reasons (because it probably helps the bill pass more than them voting for it) for them to do this, so this doesn't seem terribly surprising.

I don't understand what you mean by "establishing a precedent"? Isn't this now Business as Usual when the Dems have the Presidency and the GOP controls Congress? Anyway, I otherwise agree with what you posted. Never really expected Warren or Sanders to vote for this.

It’s about a $69 billion cut to spending next year and a $112 billion cut in 2025, with no significant budget caps or automatic cuts kicking in after two years. It leaves Biden’s major achievements, from the Inflation Reduction Act to student loan cancellation, intact.

Threatening default — and we came within days of it this time — in order to get a deal like this is like threatening to detonate a bomb beneath the bank unless the teller gives you $150 and a commemorative mug. It’s a bizarre mismatch of means and ends.

Ezra Klein wrote:Threatening default — and we came within days of it this time — in order to get a deal like this is like threatening to detonate a bomb beneath the bank unless the teller gives you $150 and a commemorative mug. It’s a bizarre mismatch of means and ends.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:49 am

Ezra Klein wrote:Threatening default — and we came within days of it this time — in order to get a deal like this is like threatening to detonate a bomb beneath the bank unless the teller gives you $150 and a commemorative mug. It’s a bizarre mismatch of means and ends.

McCarthy didn't go in looking for $150 and a commemorative mug. He went in looking for the contents of the bank, and then he got completely out-negotiated.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:49 am

Ezra Klein wrote:Threatening default — and we came within days of it this time — in order to get a deal like this is like threatening to detonate a bomb beneath the bank unless the teller gives you $150 and a commemorative mug. It’s a bizarre mismatch of means and ends.

McCarthy didn't go in looking for $150 and a commemorative mug. He went in looking for the contents of the bank, and then he got completely out-negotiated.

malchior wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 8:15 am

YellowKing wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:49 am

Ezra Klein wrote:Threatening default — and we came within days of it this time — in order to get a deal like this is like threatening to detonate a bomb beneath the bank unless the teller gives you $150 and a commemorative mug. It’s a bizarre mismatch of means and ends.

McCarthy didn't go in looking for $150 and a commemorative mug. He went in looking for the contents of the bank, and then he got completely out-negotiated.

The accounts that have come out of the negotiations don't really support this idea. McCarthy's negotiators never even actually asked for the hardliner positions. They sought unspecified cuts. The lack of specificity apparently hampered them significantly. The crisis unfolded because elements of McCarthy's caucus demanded hostage taking that the leadership half-heartedly executed and that still presented significant risks that Biden's lack of general strategy leaned into.

Klein comparatively walks through how 2011 went differently not because of the negotiators but in how the GOP at the time had a cohesive framework to hang their demands around. This time they didn't. The bill the GOP had passed was crazy and unserious. It wasn't a real starting line for negotiations. Graves and McHenry didn't even use it as a framework. And even then the accounts say they almost didn't make a deal at all.

In other words, we got lucky. Two things drove this compromise. McCarthy was willing to take a risk on his speakership - which was a surprise to many (including myself). Biden also got lucky because he arrived to negotiations perilously late (May 16th!) and fortunately wasn't put to task. They essentially threw policy positions at each other that caused multiple blow outs that led to some of the public outbursts. In the end, Graves/McHenry/McCarthy were willing to take something modest. If the Republicans had their act together or if the discord in the GOP was more serious then this might have turned out very differently.

I didn't quote it but Klein also wonders what the speakership fight was about since that the debt ceiling and the budget process were the impetus behind the revolt and the rules changes that were supposed to weaken McCarthy's ability to compromise. It seems like the speakership fight was even more performative than we realized at the time.