The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
President Biden's Cabinet
enlightenedbum
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Here is a thread to speculate wildly about Joe Biden's cabinet.
Common rumors so far include:
State: Susan Rice
Defense: Michelle Flournoy
Justice: Doug Jones or Sally Yates
Treasury: Jared Bernstein
There is also a rumored NO SENATORS rule, so nothing incredibly stupid like putting Sherrod Brown in the cabinet should happen. Also means no Warren to Treasury or Sanders to Labor, but both of those would have been bad ideas anyway as they are more valuable in the Senate.
Common rumors so far include:
State: Susan Rice
Defense: Michelle Flournoy
Justice: Doug Jones or Sally Yates
Treasury: Jared Bernstein
There is also a rumored NO SENATORS rule, so nothing incredibly stupid like putting Sherrod Brown in the cabinet should happen. Also means no Warren to Treasury or Sanders to Labor, but both of those would have been bad ideas anyway as they are more valuable in the Senate.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Bogart on
+7
Posts
Edit - Yikes Flournoy isn't any better. This is bad news for the rest of the world if true.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
And even then it’s more traditional to give them an ambassadorship to a country where it doesn’t really matter who the ambassador is but maybe they would want to live there for a few years.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Maybe for Siberia.
I think this is really a great play.
If so, that senator should get a cabinet position
That list:
1) Toomey
2) Johnson
3) McConnell
4) Collins
5) Tillis
6) Burr
7) Daines (until the new Governor is sworn in)
I think that's it.
And yeah, Cuomo would appoint himself before her.
Anyway, at the idea (in the other thread) of Buttigieg getting VA; I think it's a better idea that it might immediately seem.
IMO the VA is low key one of the most important institutions that can be focused on in a split government, and has a lot of potential to effect other things if handled right.
You aren't going to find many in the public who are against reforming the VA. You are going to have a hard time if you're in government arguing against helping veterans. I realize this flies in the face of the reality that the VA is continuously a broken system with enough red tape to build a bridge across the atlantic with. However, with the ACA being threatened right now, reforming the VA into a super functional government run health care system would give a lot of options moving forward on how to get something like single payer and universal coverage from the government, bypassing the minefield that is medicare/caid and pushing private insurance out of the picture before they can even get their hands on it.
Obviously it wouldn't be that simple, but Buttigieg is a quality media personality, regardless of his personal politics being far more conservative than what appeals to me. If they're going to do this, with McConnell blocking everything else, if they can have Buttigieg on TV selling this reform, hard, and shutting down the occasional opposition, it gives a lot of room for Biden and the House to present solid reform (that just coincidentally would resemble what a single payer system would look like; totally an accident!) and sell it to the right.
It makes sense in my head at least. Probably unrealistic or too optimistic; but Biden is going to have his hands tied if we can't get those runoffs in Georgia, and they need a solid plan of non-EO policies they can push for accomplishments before 2022/24.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran are from Kansas, and their Governor is also a dem (Laura Kelly)
Well as soon as the next senator is sworn in you could always fire them for being terrible
True. I always forget about that one because Kansas.
I think you can have proven administrators working under a good communicator who already has a public profile at the head.
A wonk might be good to actually come up with plans, but they're not going to get eyes on screens watching to even hear their plans.
Buttigieg doesn't need to be coming up with the ideas himself, he could just be the attack dog selling it.
EDIT: And lets be honest. He's going to run for president again, there is pretty much no doubt. Democrats need to be doing a better job of setting up the next generation, and despite my preference for people like AOC with progressive policies; the fact is they're going to need some moderates too. He's young, charismatic, intelligent and capable of holding his own in debates, on media, and communicating information clearly. If they can hand him some victories that might mitigate some of the controversy over his mayoral activities, he's a pretty clear person to push forward, and it would be an opportunity to do so.
However, if there are any proven administrators who could head the VA who also could defend the VA and any potential reform, who also young enough to take advantage of positive attention from the role for future political aspirations, I'd love to know who. It's too hard to not imagine if we just get some policy person in the role that can't sell anything and doesn't inspire interest in change, the VA will just get pushed aside like it usually does.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
The regulatory power at FDA, Labor, etc. is seriously underrated here.
Is Scott Manley busy?
Yeah, people seem to have forgotten that when they set up the USA pandemic diseases and public health were a huge deal. The CDC can do pretty much whatever the hell it wants to control pandemic viruses if the President lets them.
Biggest annoyance right now: Record setting last three days and 74(?) days until they'll be allowed to do any damn thing.
I wonder how fucking illegal it would be for Joe Biden to privately set up a CDC equivalent and just have them issue public statements. Probably issues of information access.
I don't see how. I don't see what we can do in foreign policy at the moment given all the damage that has been done.
My hope is that Biden just starts hosting regular virus updates and having people from the CDC come speak alongside him. The concern with doing anything is that the Senate won't let him and will not let him rehire the people Trump fires when he is at the helm, but, I think the Senate knows its a really solid plan to put the CDC back in charge and juice the economy with some big fat checks for 12 months. They can look at Australia, Taiwan, China, Singapore. You can beat this virus back, and then you make money again.
GRITTY
Foreign policy goal #1 right now has to be to shut down all international travel for reasons other than the shipment of goods. Gotta start helping more and more countries clear out the virus, and persuade people to do that on a local, district by district, country by country level. Gotta distribute vaccines, and PPE. Build international task forces to combat the virus and so on.
Don't think the Senate get to say jack shit about the CDC via confirmation. Could be wrong.
Obviously they have budget influence which is gonna be an issue.
There is now precedent of using DoD money as a presidential slush fund...
Like, even if Biden wants Susan Rice for State the Benghazi crowd is going to flip their shit and make it hard to confirm her.
Kennedy and Cassidy also fit the bill. I don't know if our state has the governor appoint interim Senators odd the top of my head though. Kennedy feels like just enough of a weasel to be temptable, but I don't think you could offer him enough to actually do it.
Of those Louisiana and Wisconsin have a special election rule, the others would be governor appointed.
I think I speak for all of Wisconsin when I say, "Send Johnson literally anywhere. Fuck that guy right in the eye."
I mean, in Parliamentary systems sometimes you would do this if you had a minority or coalition government but I don’t understand it in the US context.
Please don’t tell me it’s in the name of some bullshit norms about being bi-partisan or something.