Rob Portman won't be seeking re-election. Given trends in Ohio, he'll probably be replaced with someone crazier.
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.
Rob Portman won't be seeking re-election. Given trends in Ohio, he'll probably be replaced with someone crazier.
Well, if they go with someone crazier. Maybe said crazy will be foul enough, that it starts to cause republicans in less fuck awful states issues. Though not holding my breath on that one.
Rob Portman won't be seeking re-election. Given trends in Ohio, he'll probably be replaced with someone crazier.
Well, if they go with someone crazier. Maybe said crazy will be foul enough, that it starts to cause republicans in less fuck awful states issues. Though not holding my breath on that one.
Yeah despite Sherrod Brown and the media insisting Ohio is some purple toss up state its pretty Likely R at this point.
Only way it's competitive is if the Republicans end up with a Todd Akin/Richard Mourdock style rape-apologist -- remember that those two lost senate races in Missouri and Indiana in 2012, the latter in a formerly GOP-held seat.
Which, given the GOP's meltdown right now, is maybe a 50/50 proposition.
Yeah despite Sherrod Brown and the media insisting Ohio is some purple toss up state its pretty Likely R at this point.
Only way it's competitive is if the Republicans end up with a Todd Akin/Richard Mourdock style rape-apologist -- remember that those two lost senate races in Missouri and Indiana in 2012, the latter in a formerly GOP-held seat.
Which, given the GOP's meltdown right now, is maybe a 50/50 proposition.
Or we clone Sherrod Brown and age him up to 30 before 2022.
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.
Sinema has not budged on the filibuster even though McConnell is literally filibustering the organizing resolution so Democrats can't get their gavels. Or obviously actually pass any legislation.
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.
Manchin and Sinema would have an easier time keeping their seats if they helped pass popular stuff no matter the obstacles.
Sinema certainly would given Arizona trends. Dem base has less of a hold on Manchin because anyone they replace him with almost definitely loses.
enlightenedbum on
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.
Manchin and Sinema would have an easier time keeping their seats if they helped pass popular stuff no matter the obstacles.
That's not even the issue, it's that Manchin and Sinema are the marginal votes and they don't want to give up the ability to unilaterally demand concessions on whatever they want even if the policy will pass without their vote.
Manchin and Sinema would have an easier time keeping their seats if they helped pass popular stuff no matter the obstacles.
That's not even the issue, it's that Manchin and Sinema are the marginal votes and they don't want to give up the ability to unilaterally demand concessions on whatever they want even if the policy will pass without their vote.
They're only the marginal votes if the filibuster is removed.
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.
+30
thatassemblyguyJanitor of Technical Debt.Registered Userregular
Manchin and Sinema would have an easier time keeping their seats if they helped pass popular stuff no matter the obstacles.
The challenge for Sinema is optics (for both her and Kelly). She ran on a platform of being able to reach across the aisle and being an 'independent' senator for arizona because arizona is very red-purple.
Even if things get better in AZ for most people; the attack ads the GOP can and will run will destroy her chances for reelection in AZ, and it's difficult to then say, "well primary her from the left" because AZ doesn't lean that far left. And the Senate candidate that the GOP put up will be in the vein of McSally/Biggs/MAGA Terrorist Supporter.
Biden just won your fucking state like you might be able to be slightly braver Sinema.
Barely. Biden barely won the state. Kelly had more votes and Kelly's campain was similar to Sinema's ("independent senator from AZ").
The rest of the down-ticket ballots were deeply GOP (House, State, and Local governments).
The AZ Senator seats are incredibly vulnerable (which is why we need DC and PR as states).
Edit:
As pointed out in the voter suppression thread, because of the GOP dominance in the State and Local elections for Arizona, they're moving forward with multiple voter suppression bills:
Definitely not if Democrats take their theoretical unified control of the government and do fuck all with it because they refuse to eliminate an anti-democratic relic of Jim Crow.
enlightenedbum on
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.
Rob Portman won't be seeking re-election. Given trends in Ohio, he'll probably be replaced with someone crazier.
Well, if they go with someone crazier. Maybe said crazy will be foul enough, that it starts to cause republicans in less fuck awful states issues. Though not holding my breath on that one.
hasn't worked yet
maybe this time will be different
It worked in 2010 in Delaware and 2012 Indiana and Missouri Senate races.
Sinema has not budged on the filibuster even though McConnell is literally filibustering the organizing resolution so Democrats can't get their gavels. Or obviously actually pass any legislation.
Tweet text, because it didn't load for me so I had to quote the post to find the tweet, copy past the text to another browser, and then I got to see what was being talked about;
I erred in our weekend Senate story suggesting that @SenatorSinema might be entertaining a shift on the filibuster.
Not so, says spox: "Kyrsten ... is not open to changing her mind about eliminating the filibuster."
It's not just @Sen_JoeManchin, folks!
By @mikedebonis, who as EBum noted, is a Washington Post reporter.
Edit: of course now that I've jumped through all of those hoops, it bothers loading up.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
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.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
Tell him whatever he wants to hear to get the Organizing Resolution passed and then point and laugh while you go back on your word. It seems like the obvious thing to do.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
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.
Sinema has not budged on the filibuster even though McConnell is literally filibustering the organizing resolution so Democrats can't get their gavels. Or obviously actually pass any legislation.
Please check out the new rules regarding tweet posts.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
I don't think we've reached that point, but as of this moment we're on pace to re-live the 2009 days where Democrats are extremely reluctant to wield power, to their own detriment.
It's still early, and this could potentially change later, but I'm of the opinion that the window to act is much smaller than many people think.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
...Were they asleep for the last 12 years?
They don't say with which group that deal will be made, much easier to work with Sinema and Manchin than McConnel.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
There should not be a deal made for this. This is disgusting and infuriating.
+9
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
There should not be a deal made for this. This is disgusting and infuriating.
I'm angry in a way that I thought I wasn't capable of being anymore, and even that anger is an exasperated sigh at this point.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
There should not be a deal made for this. This is disgusting and infuriating.
I'm angry in a way that I thought I wasn't capable of being anymore, and even that anger is an exasperated sigh at this point.
At this point I think you just have to start holding anti-Sinema and anti-Manchin protests in your home states. Protests and anger seem much more effective than hoping they'll decide to be the Far Left Boogeyman out of the kindness of their hearts.
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
There should not be a deal made for this. This is disgusting and infuriating.
I'm angry in a way that I thought I wasn't capable of being anymore, and even that anger is an exasperated sigh at this point.
At this point I think you just have to start holding anti-Sinema and anti-Manchin protests in your home states. Protests and anger seem much more effective than hoping they'll decide to be the Far Left Boogeyman out of the kindness of their hearts.
What would that do in states that don't vote for either of them? Manchin and Sinema are doing what they think will keep them elected, unless you can show you can primary them with someone who can then get elected in that state you're just saying "I'd rather this be a republican."
Preacher on
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
“If I haven’t said it very plain, maybe Sen. McConnell hasn’t understood, I want to basically say it for you. That I will not vote in this Congress, that’s two years, right? I will not vote” to change the filibuster, Manchin (D-W.Va.) said in an interview on Monday afternoon. “And I hope with that guarantee in place he will work in a much more amicable way.”
Some Democrats say if Republicans block Democrats’ priorities, it’s worth preserving the ability to change the rules later. Asked if there is any scenario that would change his mind, he replied: “None whatsoever that I will vote to get rid of the filibuster.”
And here's the full quote from WaPo columnist Greg Sargent:
So is the current plan with the senate still "whoopsiedoodles, McConnell remains the majority leader in any way that matters, including control of all of the committees," or are there actually options to avoid that scenario?
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
There should not be a deal made for this. This is disgusting and infuriating.
I'm angry in a way that I thought I wasn't capable of being anymore, and even that anger is an exasperated sigh at this point.
At this point I think you just have to start holding anti-Sinema and anti-Manchin protests in your home states. Protests and anger seem much more effective than hoping they'll decide to be the Far Left Boogeyman out of the kindness of their hearts.
What would that do in states that don't vote for either of them? Manchin and Sinema are doing what they think will keep them elected, unless you can show you can primary them with someone who can then get elected in that state you're just saying "I'd rather this be a republican."
Manchin especially doesn't give a shit what left-leaning non-WV people think.
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.
Posts
Jim Jordan, your seat is ready.
Well, if they go with someone crazier. Maybe said crazy will be foul enough, that it starts to cause republicans in less fuck awful states issues. Though not holding my breath on that one.
hasn't worked yet
maybe this time will be different
pleasepaypreacher.net
Only way it's competitive is if the Republicans end up with a Todd Akin/Richard Mourdock style rape-apologist -- remember that those two lost senate races in Missouri and Indiana in 2012, the latter in a formerly GOP-held seat.
Which, given the GOP's meltdown right now, is maybe a 50/50 proposition.
Or we clone Sherrod Brown and age him up to 30 before 2022.
Washington Post reporter.
Sinema has not budged on the filibuster even though McConnell is literally filibustering the organizing resolution so Democrats can't get their gavels. Or obviously actually pass any legislation.
Sinema certainly would given Arizona trends. Dem base has less of a hold on Manchin because anyone they replace him with almost definitely loses.
That's not even the issue, it's that Manchin and Sinema are the marginal votes and they don't want to give up the ability to unilaterally demand concessions on whatever they want even if the policy will pass without their vote.
They're only the marginal votes if the filibuster is removed.
The challenge for Sinema is optics (for both her and Kelly). She ran on a platform of being able to reach across the aisle and being an 'independent' senator for arizona because arizona is very red-purple.
Even if things get better in AZ for most people; the attack ads the GOP can and will run will destroy her chances for reelection in AZ, and it's difficult to then say, "well primary her from the left" because AZ doesn't lean that far left. And the Senate candidate that the GOP put up will be in the vein of McSally/Biggs/MAGA Terrorist Supporter.
It's super fucked up.
Barely. Biden barely won the state. Kelly had more votes and Kelly's campain was similar to Sinema's ("independent senator from AZ").
The rest of the down-ticket ballots were deeply GOP (House, State, and Local governments).
The AZ Senator seats are incredibly vulnerable (which is why we need DC and PR as states).
Edit:
As pointed out in the voter suppression thread, because of the GOP dominance in the State and Local elections for Arizona, they're moving forward with multiple voter suppression bills:
https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43312795/#Comment_43312795
This means we can't expect the next elections to be free/fair and lean Dem like they did in 2018 and 2020 for the Senate seats.
It worked in 2010 in Delaware and 2012 Indiana and Missouri Senate races.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Tweet text, because it didn't load for me so I had to quote the post to find the tweet, copy past the text to another browser, and then I got to see what was being talked about;
By @mikedebonis, who as EBum noted, is a Washington Post reporter.
Edit: of course now that I've jumped through all of those hoops, it bothers loading up.
Another reason why I think DC statehood, despite it's abundance of upsides and relative lack of downsides, is also a long shot
pleasepaypreacher.net
Tell him whatever he wants to hear to get the Organizing Resolution passed and then point and laugh while you go back on your word. It seems like the obvious thing to do.
They seem to believe a deal will end up being made.
Please check out the new rules regarding tweet posts.
I don't think we've reached that point, but as of this moment we're on pace to re-live the 2009 days where Democrats are extremely reluctant to wield power, to their own detriment.
It's still early, and this could potentially change later, but I'm of the opinion that the window to act is much smaller than many people think.
...Were they asleep for the last 12 years?
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
They don't say with which group that deal will be made, much easier to work with Sinema and Manchin than McConnel.
pleasepaypreacher.net
There should not be a deal made for this. This is disgusting and infuriating.
Ideally just Congress. Biden's legislative agenda would tie in as well.
I'm angry in a way that I thought I wasn't capable of being anymore, and even that anger is an exasperated sigh at this point.
At this point I think you just have to start holding anti-Sinema and anti-Manchin protests in your home states. Protests and anger seem much more effective than hoping they'll decide to be the Far Left Boogeyman out of the kindness of their hearts.
What would that do in states that don't vote for either of them? Manchin and Sinema are doing what they think will keep them elected, unless you can show you can primary them with someone who can then get elected in that state you're just saying "I'd rather this be a republican."
pleasepaypreacher.net
And here's the full quote from WaPo columnist Greg Sargent:
Manchin especially doesn't give a shit what left-leaning non-WV people think.
Sinema's politics I'm less certain of.