Biden strikes out with King Manchin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very surprised by the reaction from Dems tonight. I remember lots of you praising Liz Cheney and John McCain for taking principled stands against their own party, so I was sure the same standard would apply here for Manchin. /s

What’s the principled stand here? Not enough money for fossil fuels? How brave.

Not spending TRILLIONS off the backs of tax payers.

BBB was paid for. The increase in defense funding was not but Manchin had no problem voting yes there.

Your idea of paid for and not paid for is vastly different from mine.

What is yours? Mine is revenue minus spending. If it’s positive, then it’s paid for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very surprised by the reaction from Dems tonight. I remember lots of you praising Liz Cheney and John McCain for taking principled stands against their own party, so I was sure the same standard would apply here for Manchin. /s

What’s the principled stand here? Not enough money for fossil fuels? How brave.

Not spending TRILLIONS off the backs of tax payers.

BBB was paid for. The increase in defense funding was not but Manchin had no problem voting yes there.

Your idea of paid for and not paid for is vastly different from mine.

What is yours? Mine is revenue minus spending. If it’s positive, then it’s paid for.

Do you mean projected revenue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very surprised by the reaction from Dems tonight. I remember lots of you praising Liz Cheney and John McCain for taking principled stands against their own party, so I was sure the same standard would apply here for Manchin. /s

What’s the principled stand here? Not enough money for fossil fuels? How brave.

Not spending TRILLIONS off the backs of tax payers.

BBB was paid for. The increase in defense funding was not but Manchin had no problem voting yes there.

Your idea of paid for and not paid for is vastly different from mine.

What is yours? Mine is revenue minus spending. If it’s positive, then it’s paid for.

Do you mean projected revenue?

New revenue from BBB. And new spending from BBB. Above baseline. That’s how the government budgets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very surprised by the reaction from Dems tonight. I remember lots of you praising Liz Cheney and John McCain for taking principled stands against their own party, so I was sure the same standard would apply here for Manchin. /s

What’s the principled stand here? Not enough money for fossil fuels? How brave.

Not spending TRILLIONS off the backs of tax payers.

BBB was paid for. The increase in defense funding was not but Manchin had no problem voting yes there.

Your idea of paid for and not paid for is vastly different from mine.

What is yours? Mine is revenue minus spending. If it’s positive, then it’s paid for.

Do you mean projected revenue?

New revenue from BBB. And new spending from BBB. Above baseline. That’s how the government budgets.

DP. The projected additional income from cracking down on tax cheats should go towards reducing government debt. Just because we get a bit of money doesn’t mean we should spend it on additional handouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very surprised by the reaction from Dems tonight. I remember lots of you praising Liz Cheney and John McCain for taking principled stands against their own party, so I was sure the same standard would apply here for Manchin. /s

What’s the principled stand here? Not enough money for fossil fuels? How brave.

Not spending TRILLIONS off the backs of tax payers.

BBB was paid for. The increase in defense funding was not but Manchin had no problem voting yes there.

Your idea of paid for and not paid for is vastly different from mine.

What is yours? Mine is revenue minus spending. If it’s positive, then it’s paid for.

Do you mean projected revenue?

New revenue from BBB. And new spending from BBB. Above baseline. That’s how the government budgets.

DP. The projected additional income from cracking down on tax cheats should go towards reducing government debt. Just because we get a bit of money doesn’t mean we should spend it on additional handouts.

If only we could go back in time and tell that to GWB!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very surprised by the reaction from Dems tonight. I remember lots of you praising Liz Cheney and John McCain for taking principled stands against their own party, so I was sure the same standard would apply here for Manchin. /s

What’s the principled stand here? Not enough money for fossil fuels? How brave.

Not spending TRILLIONS off the backs of tax payers.

BBB was paid for. The increase in defense funding was not but Manchin had no problem voting yes there.

Your idea of paid for and not paid for is vastly different from mine.

What is yours? Mine is revenue minus spending. If it’s positive, then it’s paid for.

Do you mean projected revenue?

New revenue from BBB. And new spending from BBB. Above baseline. That’s how the government budgets.

DP. The projected additional income from cracking down on tax cheats should go towards reducing government debt. Just because we get a bit of money doesn’t mean we should spend it on additional handouts.

Cracking down on tax cheats wasn't included in the CBO score because they couldnt measure it. That was gravy. That was deficit reduction but i guess you all dont care about reduxing the deficit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is absolutely no way a legislator from a teeny worthless sh!+ hole state like WV should have the power to derail a bill popular with those from states that make America the world leader it is. Primary him, if for nothing else than to punish him and those who put him in office.
That said this is also on Joe and his incredible lack of leadership. He was elected because he’s not trump and well he’s not trump but that’s about it. The Party is rudderless.
Disgusting.

He's the only 'Democrat' in West Virginia who can win national elected office. He loses tomorrow, its a Republican senator. He goes into a coma tomorrow, its a Republican senator. Why? Because West Virginia is a Republican state led by a Republican governor.

Him and his supporters in WV are useless anyway so it’ll be a wash.

IDK if you're aware or not but the minute Manchin steps aside or switches party, the control of the United States Senate switches over to the GOP. That means no more Biden appointees, nominees, ambassadors, or judges.

ESPECIALLY judges. Biden has flipped the 2nd and 4th circuit courts in a single year. He's put more judges on the bench since the Reagan presidency. This is incredibly important work.

Biden's appointees are already being held up. God I hate US politics where winning popular majorities in elections means absolutely nothing. The only way to get anything done in American politics is to cheat.

I guess that explains why Democrats are so opposed to Voter ID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I personally find so perplexing is that the democrats keep harping on and on about voting rights, while:

1. They keep saying “it’s 49 senators against 1” when it’s actually “51 against 49”, and

2. They refuse to accept Joe Manchin’s vote, and they keep thinking they can bully and coerce him into changing his vote to what they want.

It strikes me as such hypocrisy. They need to accept people’s votes and also learn to count.

You won’t get an answer on this board.

It’s so surprising they would completely disrespect someone’s vote like that. It’s almost like they’re trying to cheat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I personally find so perplexing is that the democrats keep harping on and on about voting rights, while:

1. They keep saying “it’s 49 senators against 1” when it’s actually “51 against 49”, and

2. They refuse to accept Joe Manchin’s vote, and they keep thinking they can bully and coerce him into changing his vote to what they want.

It strikes me as such hypocrisy. They need to accept people’s votes and also learn to count.

You won’t get an answer on this board.

It’s so surprising they would completely disrespect someone’s vote like that. It’s almost like they’re trying to cheat.

Give it a rest. The GOP would sign this if they crafted the bill. They’re purely interested in obstruction of anything that might be seen as a Biden win for their own power and at the expense of the millions of their constituents who would benefit from the bill. Stop pretending like that 50 has any interest in bi partisanship - or the growth, health, and prosperity of the 99%. They don’t. Which is why Manchin is so critical.

[Anonymous]

Thank goodness for Manchin. These people are going to make inflation 18%!

He is saving our country.

[Anonymous]

So he’s switching parties right? Maybe running?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness for Manchin. These people are going to make inflation 18%!

He is saving our country.

You are so stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So he’s switching parties right? Maybe running?

I’m a registered Dem. If Manchin runs, I’d vote for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he’s switching parties right? Maybe running?

I’m a registered Dem. If Manchin runs, I’d vote for him.

Oh my god. Really? Or just like in a theoretical universe where he might actually win? Please don’t be an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So he’s switching parties right? Maybe running?

What’s his end game?

He’s making himself a household name with this bill.