I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though.
I was a "Liberal Republican" while there still was such a thing, and call myself "Center-Right" now. I've never called myself a "conservative", and especially won't now that…
I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though.
I was a "Liberal Republican" while there still was such a thing, and call myself "Center-Right" now. I've never called myself a "conservative", and especially won't now that the word is meaningless. I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended: preserving and extending individual liberty, no filibuster, the House and the Electoral College growing to keep pace with the growth and distribution of the population, the debt limit respected and not gamed, strong federal action against racial discrimination and to dismantle structural racism (the Civil War Amendments are as much part of the Constitution as Articles I-VII!), the states and the federal government respecting each others' authority, including NOT incorporating the Second Amendment against the states, and levels of progressive taxation adequate to support the level of public services that the people decide, through their representatives, that they want to have and pay for. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much.
"I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though."
This is where I don't understand the moderate argument. Neither Manchin nor the person who will be worse will allow the necessary reforms to get us out of this situation. Where is the hope to be found then? We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.
"I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended [...]. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much."
We are generally the same at that level of abstraction but the real world doesn't operate at that level so it is kind of meaningless. I say that not to be flippant and insulting but to communicate how cynical I am of that level of connection. Still, I understand and respect the sentiment.
Manchin was the best we were ever going to get out of West Virginia, and he WAS willing to work with Biden on a wide range of changes; if Jim Justice will be willing to work with him on anything, I'll be more than pleasantly surprised, I'll be flabbergasted. Anyone who doubts that that there's a big difference between the two is going to see next year.
Good discussion -- thanks. Politics and baseball will always break our hearts; the best we can do with politics is to try to keep it moving more or less in the right direction most of the time. Baseball is already the perfect blend of tragedy and hope, so we should probably stick to reforming politics.
I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though.
I was a "Liberal Republican" while there still was such a thing, and call myself "Center-Right" now. I've never called myself a "conservative", and especially won't now that the word is meaningless. I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended: preserving and extending individual liberty, no filibuster, the House and the Electoral College growing to keep pace with the growth and distribution of the population, the debt limit respected and not gamed, strong federal action against racial discrimination and to dismantle structural racism (the Civil War Amendments are as much part of the Constitution as Articles I-VII!), the states and the federal government respecting each others' authority, including NOT incorporating the Second Amendment against the states, and levels of progressive taxation adequate to support the level of public services that the people decide, through their representatives, that they want to have and pay for. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much.
"I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though."
This is where I don't understand the moderate argument. Neither Manchin nor the person who will be worse will allow the necessary reforms to get us out of this situation. Where is the hope to be found then? We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.
"I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended [...]. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much."
We are generally the same at that level of abstraction but the real world doesn't operate at that level so it is kind of meaningless. I say that not to be flippant and insulting but to communicate how cynical I am of that level of connection. Still, I understand and respect the sentiment.
Manchin was the best we were ever going to get out of West Virginia, and he WAS willing to work with Biden on a wide range of changes; if Jim Justice will be willing to work with him on anything, I'll be more than pleasantly surprised, I'll be flabbergasted. Anyone who doubts that that there's a big difference between the two is going to see next year.
Good discussion -- thanks. Politics and baseball will always break our hearts; the best we can do with politics is to try to keep it moving more or less in the right direction most of the time. Baseball is already the perfect blend of tragedy and hope, so we should probably stick to reforming politics.