Yet another debt ceiling showdown

Author: Double_R

Posts

Total: 60
#31
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,169
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
So you blame Democrats for their failure to stop the republicans from sending the US into default. Ok.

What about the republicans who sent the US into default?
Slowly moving the goalposts are we? Democrats have the ability to raise the ceiling by themselves, yet they won’t. End of story
#32
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,169
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Ramshutu
Republicans can allow cloture and allow an up/down debt ceiling vote they can all vote no to. Why don’t they do it?
If Dems want to spend more they have to raise the ceiling by themselves. Pretty simple really.

Republicans can allow a vote to extend or suspend the debt ceiling to cover existing approved responsibilities - as democrats each time it was done during Trump; why not this time?

The spending is already approved, right?
All I hear is excuses. Democrats can do it unilaterally, yet they choose not to. It’s like refusing to go buy milk unless Joe Biden gives me his approval. I don’t need his approval to go buy milk.

Why should democrats waste an opportunity to legislate in the face of Republican obstruction - simply because Republicans are threatening the country with a crippling default?  What would stop trying to leverage a default next time?
Democrats can. GOP will just pass it under reconciliation lol. Again there is nothing preventing them from raising the ceiling on their own. 

It’s like the Republicans have doused the house with Gasoline, and are holding a lit match; and your suggesting the fire will be the democrats fault for not running fast enough to fetch a fire hose.
Let me help you a little with the analogy.

Democrats are refusing to fetch a fire hose when it’s right next to them because they want to go to a party instead.
#33
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,169
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@oromagi
That was McConnell's plan.  He has now agreed to postpone to December so not much need to use reconcilliation.
Well, not really. He made the deal so Dems get more than enough time to get debt ceiling reconciliation bill in the works. Just to alleviate some excuses
#34
dfss9788
dfss9788's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 152
1
2
2
dfss9788's avatar
dfss9788
1
2
2
-->
@Double_R
Probably plenty of blame to go around. I don't see how being in either party has any impact.
#35
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,087
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Double_R
Debt is an ongoing assumption.

Relative to humanity always wanting more than it can supposedly not afford.

Republican and Democrat are simply two assumed labels that make absolutely no difference to the ongoing necessity of the debt system.

Buy now, pay later, is how it works.
#36
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ILikePie5
Again; the Republicans decided that they will hold the US hostage to a catastrophic economic default in order to force the democrats to use up a reconciliation bill. They did this by filibustering the debt bill - even though there is absolutely no reason to do so - they can simply vote no and allow an up down vote.

Indeed - the republicans stopped when the democrats offered to pass legislation via removing the filibuster.

This is 100% republicans trying to leverage catastrophic economic harm to try prevent the democrats from doing something. They should stood.

The fact of the matter is there is great reason for it. If the democrats let the republicans hold the country hostage - it will happen again, and again and again and again. The Republicans will keep filibustering debt bills, and then claim this as a precedent. 


You can’t hold someone hostage - and then blame the other side for not giving into your demands. Your logic is ridiculous.





Topic's author
#37
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
Democrats have the ability to raise the ceiling by themselves, yet they won’t. End of story
End of story? Why? Why is the Democrats failure to stop the default the story, but republicans actively causing it not?

If a terrorist kills a hostage, would you charge the hostage negotiator while letting the terrorist free?

Let me help you a little with the analogy.

Democrats are refusing to fetch a fire hose when it’s right next to them because they want to go to a party instead.
Ok, so what about the side that doused the house with gasoline and lit the match?
Topic's author
#38
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Ramshutu
You can’t hold someone hostage - and then blame the other side for not giving into your demands. Your logic is ridiculous.
Crazy thing is he knows it, he’s not stupid.

The main reason I started this thread was to see if anyone here would actually try to make this argument. It’s a bit of a fascination for me. I understand we’re in tribalistic times, but what is it that causes a person to completely abandon reason and logic twisting themselves in pretzels pretending they believe an argument they know full well is nonsense? I get why TV and radio hosts do it, I get why politicians do it, but why would anyone else?
#39
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@Double_R
I’m sure many people, including perhaps a substantial number of people in this thread - actually do believe this, but in the same way that people unswervingly believed that Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.

Orwell’s  Ministry of truth wasn’t about changing the facts so that intellectually honest people were mislead - but changing the truth so that the people that blindly believed in the party could maintain their own self deception.

In this respect, Tucker Carlsons rants, or Mitch McConnells Letter are not about trying to convince anyone, but to give their supporters the fig-leaf they need to maintain their belief that the party is always right.

I think various individuals here truly believe that republicans did nothing wrong every bit as much as they would unswervingly believe that the democrats are economic terrorists unreasonably holding the country hostage under threat of economic catastrophe if they did the same thing in 18 months.

History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.




#40
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
blaming each other doesn't work so well when you're up against the whole world.

Stop the petty shit, work with people you immensely dislike and realise life isn't all about being friends, it's about learning to use your enemies with charisma and negotiation when needed.

The biggest issue that the US has, more than almost any other highly developed nation in 2021 is that it has a habit that only the very least developed nations have; party line rivalries are considered more important than nation-dividing rivalries. 

Pretty much every other nation has realised that settling things like caps, sensible public service viability for the poor, structure so that Capitalism can take place securely without running the risk of nepotism and severe poverty causing unfair disparity a few generations down the line (ghettos benefit nobody in the long run) and then debate the serious issues.

For instance, when cops handle a serious situation in non-US highly developed nations and didn't necessarily arrive fast and act swiftly enough to stop the criminal before deaths, the headlines are extremely rarely about 'oh look what a screw up the cops are under this party' (by media supporting the other party), it's much more about ideas to help, rather than party-differences even if those very ideas are things that one campaign had over another. It will be raised again later on in candidate debates but only in the sense of 'we could have handled this better' more than 'you totally screwed up'.

The US is also the only nation I have ever seen that so quickly takes to immature habits like Twitter squabbles and petty oneupmanship. Other highly developed nations play dirty of course, smear campaigning has been around for centuries even before newpapers could easily be bought, word of mouth worked wonders. I am saying that the level to which it happens and lack of asking 'alright in the end Republican Party and Democrat Party should be more united in end-goals than other nation's parties because otherwise why are we even a nation?'

I have yet to see even one US candidate, let alone president, recommend less hostility. Even the Independents advocate for more, not less, hostility down the party lines.
#41
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Double_R
Both. The only president with a budget surplus since 1982 has been Bill Clinton. The worst budget deficit was by Obama (I haven't seen the data updated for trump's last two years though). There is not a party trend for spending.
#42
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Double_R
We are to blame for continuing to elect these incompetents.
When are we going to get it that Congress does not know what it is constitutionally all about, because it isn 't what they're doing. Congress is legitimately, constitutionally, a legislative body, but they do just about anything  but. Primarily, they want to be DOJ, investigating everybody and everything except what they're supposed to investigate for legislative purpose. Investigation, otherwise, is a job already taken.
#43
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Ramshutu
I’m sure many people, including perhaps a substantial number of people in this thread - actually do believe this, but in the same way that people unswervingly believed that Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.

Orwell’s  Ministry of truth wasn’t about changing the facts so that intellectually honest people were mislead - but changing the truth so that the people that blindly believed in the party could maintain their own self deception.

In this respect, Tucker Carlsons rants, or Mitch McConnells Letter are not about trying to convince anyone, but to give their supporters the fig-leaf they need to maintain their belief that the party is always right.

I think various individuals here truly believe that republicans did nothing wrong every bit as much as they would unswervingly believe that the democrats are economic terrorists unreasonably holding the country hostage under threat of economic catastrophe if they did the same thing in 18 months.
self identified Republicans are evenly split on their approval of Republicans in congress, compared with Democrats who approve of their congressional leaders by a 36 point margin: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/09/23/views-of-biden-and-congressional-leaders/ 

Say what you will about Republicans but being brainwashed into cult like enthusiasm for their congressional leaders is the opposite of the truth. Democrats have a reasonable degree of skepticism as well, I don't think accusing Democrat voters of just going along with whatever their party establishment says would be a fair attack at all, but it's a completely ludicrous one to level against Republicans. 

This is quite simple and has nothing to do with your opponents being brainwashed devotees to the party. Republicans want to force Democrats to use reconciliation to use up a bill, use up some of their time, and own the scary sounding debt ceiling number for obvious reasons. Democrats do not want to do these things for equally obvious reasons. Neither party is holding the country hostage, and the US is not going to default. It's a game of chicken over whose political project suffers a minor setback and whose does not, and it's a game that Republicans have the advantage in because the fact is that the Democrats do have the votes. They may not want to do it that way, but "we have the presidency, the house, and the votes in the senate but didn't want to do it the way Mitch made us" isn't going to hold up at all in the court of public opinion if the US actually defaulted. The fact that the 7 Republicans who voted to impeach Donald Trump are firmly in McConnell's corner on this should suggest something to you regarding this issue.

The reason that people (of both parties) would change their positions if the situation was reversed is because all of this rules drama is just the means to an end, the means themselves are not inherently right or wrong so it makes sense that people don't actually care about the rules. What they care about are the ends. This is why 32 Democrats, including Chuck Schumer, signed a letter in support of the filibuster under Trump but many of them want to abolish it now: https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/07/politics/senate-filibuster-rules-letter/index.html
#44
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,169
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Ramshutu
Again; the Republicans decided that they will hold the US hostage to a catastrophic economic default in order to force the democrats to use up a reconciliation bill. They did this by filibustering the debt bill - even though there is absolutely no reason to do so - they can simply vote no and allow an up down vote.
Democrats have a mechanism to overcome the filibuster and they choose not to do it. If they want to spend more money, it’s only logical they raise the debt ceiling themselves.

Indeed - the republicans stopped when the democrats offered to pass legislation via removing the filibuster.

This is 100% republicans trying to leverage catastrophic economic harm to try prevent the democrats from doing something. They should stood.
GOP has no leverage. Democrats can singlehandedly pass a bill to raise the debt ceiling.

The fact of the matter is there is great reason for it. If the democrats let the republicans hold the country hostage - it will happen again, and again and again and again. The Republicans will keep filibustering debt bills, and then claim this as a precedent. 
And Democrats will raise it via reconciliation just like it’s been done for decades and vice versa.

You can’t hold someone hostage - and then blame the other side for not giving into your demands. Your logic is ridiculous.
GOP isn’t holding the Dems hostage. It’s like tying the Dems in a chair with a simple knot and the Dems don’t even try to untie it and escape.
#45
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ILikePie5
Again; the Republicans decided that they will hold the US hostage to a catastrophic economic default in order to force the democrats to use up a reconciliation bill. They did this by filibustering the debt bill - even though there is absolutely no reason to do so - they can simply vote no and allow an up down vote.

Indeed - the republicans stopped when the democrats offered to pass legislation via removing the filibuster.

This is 100% republicans trying to leverage catastrophic economic harm to try prevent the democrats from doing something. 

The fact of the matter is there is great reason for it. If the democrats let the republicans hold the country hostage - it will happen again, and again and again and again. The Republicans will keep filibustering debt bills, and then claim this as a precedent. 


You can’t hold someone hostage - and then blame the other side for not giving into your demands. Your logic is ridiculous.
You appear to have missed the key point again; please refer to my old post; I’ve helpfully bolded the important parts.

Republicans are leveraging the threat of catastrophic default - by filibustering debt legislation - in order to force democrats to use up their spending bill. 

It’s not that democrats “can just pass the bill” - republicans are holding up the debt ceiling to try and prevent the democrats from doing something.

So yes - they are very much trying to hold the country hostage, and use the threat of default to get their way. And as bolded; the democrats have a very good reason to not give in, given that if they do, this will be the new norm each time the debt ceiling comes up (at least under a democratic president)



#46
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,169
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
End of story? Why? Why is the Democrats failure to stop the default the story, but republicans actively causing it not?
Cause someone with the active power to stop it isn’t doing anything. If they’re gonna cry foul, it’s only credible if they can’t do anything about it. In this situation they can. If Dems want to spend more, they can pass legislation to enable them to.

If a terrorist kills a hostage, would you charge the hostage negotiator while letting the terrorist free?
This analogy is wrong on so many levels. Let me make it easier for you. Democrats are a sniper who has the terrorist in the scope with a shot ready, but choose not to kill the terrorist and would rather let the hostage die.

Ok, so what about the side that doused the house with gasoline and lit the match?
You mean the side that believes in fiscal responsibility right. Every Dem voted to raise the ceiling but most Republicans didn’t. Dems would rather let the country default than give up a mechanism to pass their radical legislation. They have no right to cry foul when they themselves wont do anything about it. 

Or as always, they can negotiate like it has been previously done. But I suspect Dems don’t want to give up their ability to pass their radical agenda even though Sinema and Manchin won’t allow them anyways.
#47
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,169
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Ramshutu
You appear to have missed the key point again; please refer to my old post; I’ve helpfully bolded the important parts.

Republicans are leveraging the threat of catastrophic default - by filibustering debt legislation - in order to force democrats to use up their spending bill. 
There is no leverage if Democrats and pass a bill anyways lol. Do Democrats really value a reconciliation that they could get the next FY over catastrophe? Apparently so.

It’s not that democrats “can just pass the bill” - republicans are holding up the debt ceiling to try and prevent the democrats from doing something.
You mean prevent them from passing trillions of dollars in radical legislation right? If Dems want that agenda covered in the future they can raise the ceiling themselves.

So yes - they are very much trying to hold the country hostage, and use the threat of default to get their way. And as bolded; the democrats have a very good reason to not give in, given that if they do, this will be the new norm each time the debt ceiling comes up (at least under a democratic president)
You didn’t read my response then. There is a mechanism around it. Use it. That’s why it’s there in the first half place.
#48
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ILikePie5
There is no leverage if Democrats and pass a bill anyways lol. Do Democrats really value a reconciliation that they could get the next FY over catastrophe? Apparently so.
Again - simply ignoring everything Nd and repeating the same thing is not conducive to a decent discussion.

The debt ceiling suspension expired - and when the issue was put forward as legislation, the republicans filibustered it.  The reason they filibustered it, was to for s the democrats into using their remaining reconciliation bill.

So, specifically, the Republicans were trying to leverage fear of default in the democrats in order to prevent the democrats doing other things.

Now, you may very well be okay with that; but it is indeed the republicans leveraging that threat and precipitating that risk for partisan gain.


This ridiculous pretence you are using throughout - as if the democrats can simply pass something without any other consequences - is a flat out lie, and we both know it.

This was a transparent attempt to use the risk of economic calamity to try and force the democrats to derail their legislative agenda.

That is by definition holding the country hostage and is the specific reason that republicans here deserve the majority of the blame.
#49
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,675
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Greyparrot
literally just controlled oposition
#50
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,048
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
If only a few more bathroom doors can be pounded down maybe the 2 Democrat holdouts will fall in line.

Where does Manchin take a dump?
Topic's author
#51
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
This analogy is wrong on so many levels. Let me make it easier for you. Democrats are a sniper who has the terrorist in the scope with a shot ready, but choose not to kill the terrorist and would rather let the hostage die.
Ok, let’s use your analogy.

First, you seem to be confused about who is what here. The sniper is the Democratic Party, the hostage is the American economy, and most remarkably, the terrorist in this analogy is the Republican Party.

So your central argument breaks down immediately. To argue that the terrorist in a hostage negotiation plays no role in the story, is absurd.

Second, you are misrepresenting the sniper. You are acting as if the sniper allowed the hostage to die because they just didn’t feel like saving them. This completely ignores what Ramshutu has pointed out to you and you’ve ignored multiple times already… that the Democrats are taking a stand because they are refusing to allow themselves to be bullied by the hostage taker.

This is not a radical idea, “we will not negotiate with terrorists”  the literal policy position of the United States and has been for decades. And it’s one that every republican supports.

But most importantly, if this analogy were real and the sniper allowed the hostage to die, on some level it is reasonable for ones anger to be directed at the sniper. The reason why that is is because we expected more from him. We don’t expect anything more from terrorists because… you know… they’re terrorists.

In other words we have no expectations of them because we already understand that they are terrible human beings who are bent on destroying our way of life, which is just the long way of saying… they’re the bad guys. So they are doing what bad guys do.

But yet, your position is that they’re the good guys. You will continue to support, defend and vote republican. This is the equivalent of looking at the sniper situation, and seeing the terrorist as the person who better represents you.

That in and of itself is bad enough but it gets even worse, because not only would that say something amazing about you, but it is logically self defeating. If you side with what the terrorist is doing, then you have undercut your entire argument as to why what the sniper did was wrong. All he did was sit back and allow your side to take control to carry out the actions they said they would.

So unless you are a democrat who see’s democrats as the side that is supposed to protect you from the republicans, your argument is complete nonsense.
Topic's author
#52
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@thett3
They may not want to do it that way, but "we have the presidency, the house, and the votes in the senate but didn't want to do it the way Mitch made us" isn't going to hold up at all in the court of public opinion if the US actually defaulted.
I doubt that, but if that were the case it would only be because people lack understanding of how government works, not because that makes sense.

If the US actually defaulted it would happen with every Democrat voting to pay our bills while every republican votes to default. It can’t get any simpler then that.

The reason that people (of both parties) would change their positions if the situation was reversed is because all of this rules drama is just the means to an end, the means themselves are not inherently right or wrong so it makes sense that people don't actually care about the rules. What they care about are the ends.
The debt ceiling was raised 3 times while Trump was president, each time with more democrats voting for than republicans. This is purely a republican thing.


#53
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Double_R
I doubt that, but if that were the case it would only be because people lack understanding of how government works, not because that makes sense.

If the US actually defaulted it would happen with every Democrat voting to pay our bills while every republican votes to default. It can’t get any simpler then that.
1) People don't understand how the government works, when things go badly the party in power gets blamed rightly or wrongly. In this case, failing to perform such a basic function when you have the house, senate, and presidency would reflect extremely poorly on the governing party.

2) They can raise the debt limit alone via reconciliation or through a filibuster carve out. They are not entitled to Republican votes, if they want them they either need to make concessions or use one of the ways they have to circumvent the Republicans. This is just basic politics stuff, it's not "holding the economy hostage." It's holding the reconciliation process hostage, I guess. 

The debt ceiling was raised 3 times while Trump was president, each time with more democrats voting for than republicans. This is purely a republican thing.
If this is true this significantly raises my opinion of congressional Republicans, making me regain a modicum of respect for them. I honestly assumed that they en masse cynically dropped their concerns about "the deficit" as soon as Trump got in office and went on a spending and tax cut binge. If a sizable contingent of them stuck to their guns and defied their own President's attempts to raise the debt limit, that is impressive. Even though I tend to side with Dems on most fiscal issues, I like consistency 
#54
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,675
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Greyparrot
lol!

but seriously, its a joke and everybody knows it but no one does anything about it
#55
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,048
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Biden says it's part of the political process to knock on bathroom doors, especially if you are a traitorous Democrat.
Topic's author
#56
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,283
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@thett3
failing to perform such a basic function when you have the house, senate, and presidency would reflect extremely poorly on the governing party
I already acknowledged that people don’t understand how government works so I don’t disagree, I’m just pointing out that the argument is not valid. The fact that democrats have a path to stop republicans and fail to act on it does not mean they get more blame than the republicans who literally (hypothetically) voted to default.

You don’t get to shoot someone in the head and then blame the person who failed to stop you from doing it.

They are not entitled to Republican votes, if they want them they either need to make concessions or use one of the ways they have to circumvent the Republicans.
Republicans and their supporters do not get to make this claim. The idea here is that it’s the democrats job to avoid economic catastrophe from being brought on by republican obstruction. That can only make sense if you view republicans as your adversary.

Unless you think a recession is a good thing and want republicans to go to congress to destroy the US economy, there is no way to logically square blaming the side you oppose for failing to stop the side you support. It’s a complete contradiction.

If this is true this significantly raises my opinion of congressional Republicans, making me regain a modicum of respect for them
Why only republicans? It should raise your opinion of both parties.

I don’t take too much out of it honestly. We both know those were symbolic votes. There is no way any republican would have voted to default while their president was in office. Politically speaking, democrats would have had so much more to gain.

But I agree with what you said earlier, there was never any real threat of a default, both parties understand the seriousness of the situation. The main reason I started this thread is because most of the people defending what republicans are doing at least act as if they take it seriously, I think it’s worth examining the logic behind why they defend it.

What is not hypothetical about this is the real damage it is doing to us. Our credit rating has been down graded because of this pure silliness, so playing this game is not without consequence.

#57
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,048
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
 I don’t take too much out of it honestly. We both know those were symbolic votes. There is no way any republican would have voted to default while their president was in office. Politically speaking, democrats would have had so much more to gain.
You do realize that not raising the debt ceiling doesn't mean a default is triggered right? there are plenty of mechanisms for paying our debts that don't require borrowing money.
#58
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,174
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
"Yet another debt ceiling showdown" Ya, that didn't last long, the Republicans caved in record time. Real shocker huh. As predictable as the sun coming up in the morning.  What a worthless spineless party they are.  Who the fuck do they even claim to represent? I guess the Republican party represents the Democrat party from my perspective. They sure as hell don't represent anyone who pays taxes and plays by the rules.

#59
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@thett3
Say what you will about Republicans but being brainwashed into cult like enthusiasm for their congressional leaders is the opposite of the truth. Democrats have a reasonable degree of skepticism as well, I don't think accusing Democrat voters of just going along with whatever their party establishment says would be a fair attack at all, but it's a completely ludicrous one to level against Republicans. 


I think you’ve interpreted what I said a lot more broadly than it was intended or and are assuming it’s a bit more general than what it was being directed at.


Generally speaking, everyone’s pretty hypocritical to some degree; there is always a bit of grey are where there are different scenarios, different considerations where you have a bit of plausible deniability. We’re talking Lindsay Graham’s monologue at Clinton impeachment trial, and a whole ton of stuff the democrats do too. Most of the accusations of hypocrisy are really just trying to smear the other side, some of it has truth, much of it doesn’t, but a lot is just political kabuki theatre. It’s the general noise; and other than to push partisan bickering it doesn’t really have any other real impact.


In terms of Policy; what the Republicans broadly, especially the senate republicans, do so much better than Democrats - like Jesus H Christ we’d be in trouble if the democrats started doing it  - is not giving the first flying fuck how bad things look, or are, or the impact of what they do, providing they win. 6-3 instead of 5-4 is a case in point. The Democrats Hem and Haw about the fillibuster, knowing if they lose power, they may not have any other option - but no reasonable person would expect that Mitch McConnell would even blink for a second before removing the filibuster if control of the senate hinges upon some legislation he could not pass by other means. 

The debt ceiling, is a particularly good example of this aspect. Debt was used as a cudgel to beat democrats to death with and sweep into broad power on the back of it - recall the tea party - there were shutdowns, the US credit rating was downgraded. When Trump won; this was forgotten almost overnight - big tax cuts, increases in the military, and surprisingly little complaints other than people like Rand Paul making a big show of opposing things at the last minute before voting for the bills. Between November 2016, and November 2020, the debt ceiling was an irrelevance - and is all of a sudden now an issue again. Indeed, it isn’t the first previously nonpartisan, pro forma task that has been turned into a partisan struggle.

This is what I refer to as the Weaponized hypocrisy of the right. It’s straight up piss on your head and tell me it’s raining ridiculousness, for which simply having cover to say something is true is all that is required, no matter how untrue it actually is. This extends almost across the board; democrats continue to have the normal amount of hypocrisy; republicans have it weaponized. Trump specifically was the epitome of “I’m going to say and do whatever I want, regardless of it’s truth.” The likes of Fox News, OAN, newsmax, etc follow that pattern too in a way that is not emulated to as substantial degree by other left wing outlets.

Democrats have nothing even close to approaching this level, because at some level, they really don’t like being called hypocrites; this is not to say that they never are, just that the nature is never even close to as extreme.

So that’s one half of what I’m talking about.

The other half of the point are some of the supporters - not everyone, but the likes of more than a few individuals on this forum - are part of the die hard core of Trumpism. Bear in mind that out of the rightish wing folks I’ve engaged with here - you’re the only one who appears broadly rational; sadly the next most rational person is wylted - and if he didn’t spend so much time being a pointless bell-end, it’d be good to have him around. Not everyone else here fits into that category; but there are enough.

There’s various flavours - from the QAnon crazies, to the bill-gates-is-microchipping-me brigade; with a fair amount of overlap in all the various sub groups.

I could talk about the causes, the history, blame, and patterns over time (I have 0 doubt that the vocal supporters of Trump today, are the same ones that shouted at me for being a Terrorist Sympathizer for suggesting that Iraq likely doesn’t have any big stash of WMDs is going to turn into a shit show ; way back 2002) - but there’s a surprisingly large group of Trump supporters have created shortcuts for rejecting any information that disagrees with them.  

Any news they don’t like is fake; politicians say something they don’t like - it’s the swamp; any member of the civil service speak out - it’s the deep state; democrats say something; they’re evil and trying to destroy the country; private sector individuals - they’re shills. And in many cases, any engagement is deflected towards prepared, comfortable talking points. These are the people I’m talking about. Similar to 2009 creationists; Ken Hams and Kent Hovinds.


In this respect; all that matters is the worldview, sometimes that’s aligned with congressional politicians - sometimes not. But when it is; the justification is often post hoc.

In this case, I don’t think for a second that these people actually give a f**k about the debt ceiling; you could probably argue about spending in general, of opposition to economic policy - but this issue of the debt ceiling, and buying into that weaponized hypocrisy is part of that larger ability to systematically maintain that worldview posthoc.

Don’t get me wrong; the democrats have some crazies too - one of the people in various other threads fit that criteria too; but there’s far fewer of them, and one of the main issues with democrats is that the party is typified by pie fights and internal disagreement. This also not to say the left all have well justified well thought-out opinions on all policy matters; neither side does - only that this, relatively large, group on the right has a novel, cult-like capacity for rejecting any contrary point of view in a way that it those in the left do not currently.







#60
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Ramshutu
In terms of Policy; what the Republicans broadly, especially the senate republicans, do so much better than Democrats - like Jesus H Christ we’d be in trouble if the democrats started doing it  - is not giving the first flying fuck how bad things look, or are, or the impact of what they do, providing they win. 6-3 instead of 5-4 is a case in point. The Democrats Hem and Haw about the fillibuster, knowing if they lose power, they may not have any other option - but no reasonable person would expect that Mitch McConnell would even blink for a second before removing the filibuster if control of the senate hinges upon some legislation he could not pass by other means. 

The debt ceiling, is a particularly good example of this aspect. Debt was used as a cudgel to beat democrats to death with and sweep into broad power on the back of it - recall the tea party - there were shutdowns, the US credit rating was downgraded. When Trump won; this was forgotten almost overnight - big tax cuts, increases in the military, and surprisingly little complaints other than people like Rand Paul making a big show of opposing things at the last minute before voting for the bills. Between November 2016, and November 2020, the debt ceiling was an irrelevance - and is all of a sudden now an issue again. Indeed, it isn’t the first previously nonpartisan, pro forma task that has been turned into a partisan struggle.

This is what I refer to as the Weaponized hypocrisy of the right. It’s straight up piss on your head and tell me it’s raining ridiculousness, for which simply having cover to say something is true is all that is required, no matter how untrue it actually is. This extends almost across the board; democrats continue to have the normal amount of hypocrisy; republicans have it weaponized. Trump specifically was the epitome of “I’m going to say and do whatever I want, regardless of it’s truth.” The likes of Fox News, OAN, newsmax, etc follow that pattern too in a way that is not emulated to as substantial degree by other left wing outlets.
Here's former majority leader Harry Reid, when asked if he regrets knowingly spreading lies about Mitt Romney not paying taxes: https://time.com/3765158/harry-reid-mitt-romney-no-taxes/ 

“Well, they can call it whatever they want,” Reid said. “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

I don't really have an interest in arguing over which side is scummier, hypocritical, and more dishonest broadly. They both are, because their job is to do so. It is particularly odd that you say Mitch McConnell would abolish the filibuster if he had the chance when he had the chance and did not. I don't have an interest in defending Mitch McConnell but I do have an interest in honesty generally. In this case I actually think the Republican position is pretty reasonable, especially now that they have given the democrats some more time. The Democrats aren't entitled to Republican votes, if they want to govern as if they have LBJ style majorities despite barely winning against an incumbent who did absolutely everything he could to sabotage himself and his party, they need to be willing to pay the political price for that. Or simply make concessions. If Democrats truly didnt have time to raise the debt ceiling via reconciliation I would agree it's a horrible move, but they do. "I don't wanna!" doesn't cut it for me.

There’s various flavours - from the QAnon crazies, to the bill-gates-is-microchipping-me brigade; with a fair amount of overlap in all the various sub groups.

I could talk about the causes, the history, blame, and patterns over time (I have 0 doubt that the vocal supporters of Trump today, are the same ones that shouted at me for being a Terrorist Sympathizer for suggesting that Iraq likely doesn’t have any big stash of WMDs is going to turn into a shit show ; way back 2002) - but there’s a surprisingly large group of Trump supporters have created shortcuts for rejecting any information that disagrees with them.  

Any news they don’t like is fake; politicians say something they don’t like - it’s the swamp; any member of the civil service speak out - it’s the deep state; democrats say something; they’re evil and trying to destroy the country; private sector individuals - they’re shills. And in many cases, any engagement is deflected towards prepared, comfortable talking points. These are the people I’m talking about. Similar to 2009 creationists; Ken Hams and Kent Hovinds.
I too can construct a caricature of a particularly obnoxious version of a political opponent and then proudly proclaim that MY side doesn't have those types of people! But I won't because that isn't productive. Fortunately, most people are not overly political and there is no smart or stupid party, because politics (at least in the US) is largely not based on logic but based on loose coalitions of groups based around interests, beliefs, and identities. The fact that a persons vote can be so accurately forecasted with basic demographic data should tell you that: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/11/03/how-to-forecast-an-americans-vote I have a pretty deterministic outlook on this which is why casting aspersions on any group really rubs me the wrong way

But more importantly this doesn't actually address my criticism at all. Whatever other mental flaws may be present among many "rightists" a blind trust in authority is absolutely not among them. The fact that you cite so many conspiracy theories used to filter out unwanted information is proof enough of that.