Divided country - can politicians find more ways to work across the aisle ?

[Anonymous]

There are party sycophants (blue or red, pick your poison, they share the same DNA) and there is everyone else. We need leaders who aren’t beholden to big parties and can think for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are party sycophants (blue or red, pick your poison, they share the same DNA) and there is everyone else. We need leaders who aren’t beholden to big parties and can think for themselves.

Good luck with that. How many millions does it take to run a campaign? How many voters vote straight party line because they don't know who the candidates are?

We need legit reform. Expand the House and pass sesnsible campaign finance laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need super pacs devoted to promoting bipartisan cooperation and compromises … but it might not be sexy enough for big donors … even though it is what the country needs …

No. We need an end to super PACs.

I did not like the ruling that allowed them to form. However, since they are reality for the foreseeable future we need to get to serve democracy better.

Dark money isn’t generally interested in bettering democracy.

PACs are not synonymous with dark money

Companies are abandoning anti-democratic politicians, but they shouldn’t abandon their PACs
Much-maligned PACs represent an ideal way to fund our elections. And the American public agrees

What does the public understand that PAC critics don’t? For starters, PACs are the best example of campaign finance reform that works. Contribution ceilings ($5,000) are low, which limits the amount of a PAC’s potential influence. The same limit applies to people who support a PAC, which prevents any individual from having a disproportionate impact on how money is dispersed. PACs may only solicit from certain employees and contributions must be voluntary. 
Unlike so-called dark-money funds, PAC contributions are transparent. You can go to FEC.gov or Opensecrets.org and review every contribution of more than $200. While PACs aren’t required to have boards and bylaws, most companies use them to build trust in a PAC’s governance and make tough decisions when funds are limited.


Democratic/Liberal PACs contributions to candidates, 2021-2022 • OpenSecrets

$6,660,471
Total from Democratic/Liberal PACs to candidates, 2021-2022
$6,602,341
To Democrats
$16,620
To Republicans
160
Number of PACs

[Anonymous]

^^^^
https://rollcall.com/2021/01/15/companies-are-abandoning-anti-democratic-politicians-but-they-shouldnt-abandon-their-pacs/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What the mid terms show me is that the US is fairly equally divided between Dems and Republicans … Neither party have a mandate to act too rashly with extreme agendas. National bans on Abortion in particular should be off the table. The election deniers back by the former president did not fare well. People want to move on from the unstable unpredictable nuttiness of Trump years but not in the exact opposite direction.

Do you think more politicians will try and find ways to work across the aisle on the economy, immigration and national security threats or will the extreme posturing/ polarized Militarization of politics continue?

When you look at vote totals and factor in 1) gerrymandering and 2) the number of voters for a wyoming house seat as compared to a California or Texas House seat, the country is not really that divided. The GOP account for about 42% of the total vote yet maintain equality to supremacy in the Senate and Electoral College and equality in the House. The US is a center left country, but arcane Constitutional rules give rural, white voters more power than the urban areas. It was designed that way, for better or worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One party is working across the aisle and the GOP wants to blow everything up.

My opinion. And should. I would like some accountability first from the Dems for the economy, etc.

The Dems have been responsible for almost every job created in the US since 1989; the dems have generally presided over growing economies as compared to the GOP which basically only gives tax cuts to the rich and leave the US in recession when the leave office.

[Anonymous]

Democratic majority Congresses always negotiate bipartisan deals with Republican Presidents, as Pelosi bailed out Bush and Trump when their own party majorities couldn’t even pass appropriations bills. Democratic Presidents always are eager to negotiate bipartisan deals with Republicans in Congress but there hasn’t been a good faith Republican majority except briefly in 1996. Boehner tried but House Republicans were too insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need super pacs devoted to promoting bipartisan cooperation and compromises … but it might not be sexy enough for big donors … even though it is what the country needs …

No. We need an end to super PACs.

I did not like the ruling that allowed them to form. However, since they are reality for the foreseeable future we need to get to serve democracy better.

Dark money isn’t generally interested in bettering democracy.

PACs are not synonymous with dark money

Companies are abandoning anti-democratic politicians, but they shouldn’t abandon their PACs
Much-maligned PACs represent an ideal way to fund our elections. And the American public agrees

What does the public understand that PAC critics don’t? For starters, PACs are the best example of campaign finance reform that works. Contribution ceilings ($5,000) are low, which limits the amount of a PAC’s potential influence. The same limit applies to people who support a PAC, which prevents any individual from having a disproportionate impact on how money is dispersed. PACs may only solicit from certain employees and contributions must be voluntary. 
Unlike so-called dark-money funds, PAC contributions are transparent. You can go to FEC.gov or Opensecrets.org and review every contribution of more than $200. While PACs aren’t required to have boards and bylaws, most companies use them to build trust in a PAC’s governance and make tough decisions when funds are limited.


Democratic/Liberal PACs contributions to candidates, 2021-2022 • OpenSecrets

$6,660,471
Total from Democratic/Liberal PACs to candidates, 2021-2022
$6,602,341
To Democrats
$16,620
To Republicans
160
Number of PACs

I think there should be strict limits per donor, per candidate, per cycle, and it shouldn't be anywhere near $5000. More like $50 - because that's far more realistic for the average person than $5000 is. And I don't think people should be allowed to both contribute via a PAC AND direct contribution, should be one or the other, take your pick.

As for dark money, I think that any and all non-transparent political spending should be outright criminalized.

[Anonymous]

The Senate is working together across the aisle to tell the Republican yahoos in the House to get their sh!t together.

[Anonymous]

We have had bipartisan deals. It's just that Republicans consider those to be losses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have had bipartisan deals. It's just that Republicans consider those to be losses.

And the Republicans generally fight them the entire step of the way. There are usually one or two threats to the blow the whole thing up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have had bipartisan deals. It's just that Republicans consider those to be losses.

Virtually every "bipartisan" deal we've had was the Democrats reaching across the aisle to give concessions to the GOP, because the Democrats are the only party actually trying to pass anything other than tax cuts for the rich and laws to disenfranchise and take away bodily autonomy from our citizens. The GOP simply obstructs the Democrats and pushes bills through when they have the (all-GOP) votes.

For anyone saying otherwise, name one single major piece of legislation introduced by the GOP that made concessions to the Dems and passed with any significant bipartisan support. (Just Manchin and/or Sinema doesn't count)