General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJoe Manchin is Right.
https://news.yahoo.com/joe-manchin-115804083.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Demsrule86
(70,800 posts)
uponit7771
(91,317 posts)... boundaries with the GQP and Moscow Mitch.
There should be a hard line and then blow past it when Moscow Mitch claims he will or wont do something.
Like right now, this part of the article stands out
Democrats and Republicans should work together to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, a
Moscow Mitch said no, now what?!!?
dmacdon4
(4 posts)The yahoo opinion piece is pure Republicrat propoganda.
GoodRaisin
(9,513 posts)
LonePirate
(13,835 posts)Written by a guy who writes for a lot of leftist magazines.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Giving you at best, six of one instead of dozen of the other. 
GoodRaisin
(9,513 posts)So I wondered how he knew.
Your post number 10 tells me much more than his post did. I don't doubt your points. They align with what I generally read and hear. I expected the bill to have good and bad points. I particularly don't like that it doesn't address the subversion of states who are trying to ignore democracy. I'm glad you pointed that out, it's important information for people to know. I also found the case for the filibuster to add more right wing feel to the article.
krawhitham
(4,835 posts)GoodRaisin
(9,513 posts)Is Yahoo right wing? (I really don't read it at all.)
Blanks
(4,835 posts)He says there are things he objects to in the bill, he should do an interview and list some of them.
If he did that, everyone would stop attacking him. Makes it seem like he’s just doing it for all of the attention.
FoxNewsSucks
(10,748 posts)Worth reading, but if so, why doesn't Manchin say that instead of the crap he spews when questioned?
And in any case, republiqons still won't vote for anything anyway
He's not.
greenman3610
(3,949 posts)wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)Now stop covering for his flip-flop.
Fiendish Thingy
(17,885 posts)wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)Defund the police?
Fiendish Thingy
(17,885 posts)wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)Right?
So explain it to me like I'm five years old: What made him go from a cosponsor of HR1 to an opponent?
Fiendish Thingy
(17,885 posts)wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)What made Traitor Joe change his mind?
This shouldn't be a complicated question to answer.
Fiendish Thingy
(17,885 posts)BGBD
(3,282 posts)What a republican talking point that concept is.
LonePirate
(13,835 posts)The article makes a case for minority rule by saying the filibuster allows the minority party to stop legislation they strongly oppose. The problem with that is both parties strongly oppose everything the other party would want to pass without the filibuster. The filibuster, as it stands in our highly polarized era, upends traditional majority rule in our democracy in favor of minority rule and brings governance to a halt. Without the filibuster, the government can enact legislation. If the public does not like that legislation, there will be an election within two years where they can change the legislators in the House and in 1/3 of the Senate to correct the wrongs of that legislation. The filibuster is an anti-democratic weapon, in relation to how we have enacted democracy in this country.
Second, there are a lot of very good aspects of HR1, which the article’s author takes fault with because it would federalize elections (as if allowing vote by mail with a minimum of two weeks of early voting in non-gerrymandered congressional districts is a bad thing). Also, the civil rights aspects of the bill would join other famous pieces of legislation, namely the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments among others, which were passed by Congress via exceptionally partisan votes. Civil rights rarely pass Congress with anything resembling large bipartisan majority votes. Sure there may be things in HR1 that will not pass constitutional muster in the Supreme Court (namely the campaign finance portions). And yes, the bill should do something to address the threat of election subversion by states who ignore democracy which was the author’s other main problem with the bill. Still, there are plenty of good reasons to pass HR1. Heck, Manchin supported the 2019 version of the bill which is very similar to the 2021 version.
The article’s author along with Joe Manchin are not right on HR1 or the filibuster.
Of calling something short sighted while you advocate for eliminating the filibuster.
A two party system with pure majority rule is unsustainable for even a short period.
LonePirate
(13,835 posts)If you want to enshrine the filibuster into the Constitution, thus strengthening minority rule even more than it already is in the current Senate, then that would be changing the definition of democracy in this country. That change would require a super majority of Congress and of the states to enact. In that case, so be it. However, we don't live under a Constitution with a filibuster. As it is, the filibuster is an anti-majoritarian and anti-democracy rule. It needs to go. There is nothing short-sighted about calling for the end of the current filibuster rule in the Senate.
You seem to want a government incapable of maintaining any symbolance of continuity. To make American Government a pinball bouncing between bumpers wildly with each shift of power. Without the filibuster 8n place, the country would tear itself apart in a decade.
LonePirate
(13,835 posts)I completely disagree with the constant part. First, there might an initial changeover in control as each party rushes to push through their backlog. However, after that initial rush and after things are blocked by presidential vetoes or Supreme Court rulings, that tide of reactive legislation opposed by the other party will decrease dramatically. That will stem the turnover you're needlessly worried about.
Also, despite the fluke of the 2016 election, the chances of a Republican returning to the White House anytime soon, barring a significant economic downturn, are slim, even with the malfeasance of Republican state legislatures. GA is not reverting red as it is the new CO or VA. TX is knocking on the Dems door and it will turn blue in either 2024 or 2028. That's lights out for Republicans at the presidential level when that happens. FL becomes inconsequential and even it is not guaranteed to be in the red column for every election. A Dem president stops the bulk of the Republican horrors which prevents a lot of the turnover you fear.
Still, fear is never a valid reason to maintain an anti-democratic rule not supported by the Constitution. Supporting the filibuster is simply declaring your opposition to current American democracy while hiding behind the entirely speculative belief that the future will be worse without the filibuster. Ignoring the problems of today while cowering to a completely uncertain and unlikely fate in the future is what is actually absurd,
NJCher
(37,548 posts)He proposes this at the end:
Unless and until that happens, they have no choice but to try and work with the opposition, especially when it comes to reforming the country's electoral rules.
They've already said they're not going to do anything to further Biden's plans. McConnell said that. So I guess the author thinks we should spin our wheels some more and run out the clock, because that is the upshot of what he's got to say.
His other proposal, which I think would be workable, is untenable, he himself concludes:
Manchin provides an answer: Democrats and Republicans should work together to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, an update to the Voting Rights Act that would modernize "the formula states and localities must use to ensure proposed voting laws do not restrict the rights of any particular group or population."
His conclusion: Would it work? In truth, I doubt it — because of the enormous distance and distrust between the parties.
Regardless of the fact that the author has nothing new to say, I'm glad it was posted. It changed my mind about the filibuster because most likely republicans are going to win next round, thanks to Manchin, and we don't need to make their lives any easier.
Nexus2
(1,261 posts)That cast a very dim future for 'bipartisan' legislation for voting rights.
dem4decades
(11,827 posts)StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)As others have said, It's pure Republican propaganda. It's sad to see people here falling for it.
Fiendish Thingy
(17,885 posts)The bill was written to withstand court challenges.
The author of this article does not share pro-democracy values.
Anyone who opposes HR1 is an enabler of Jim Crow 2.0
Fiendish Thingy
(17,885 posts)In It to Win It
(9,041 posts)partisan push to pass it.
To me, the author should work harder at creating a clearer separation of his opinions from those of Joe Manchin's.
The author starts off that Joe Manchin is right about everything surrounding the bill, and then lists everything that's wrong with the bill, including how flawed the content of the bill is... and from what I can tell, Joe Manchin didn't express any opinions on the content of the bill itself.
JustAnotherGen
(33,253 posts)Damon Linker is wrong.
That's a fine suggestion, to which I'd add another. A small group of Democratic and Republican senators could start working from scratch on a more limited bipartisan bill that prioritizes election integrity. Democrats could insist on receiving assurances that the results of elections will be accepted as valid by state and federal officials in return for Republicans receiving assurances that people who cast and count ballots are doing so in accordance with the law.
They do not want non white people to vote.
That is the NUMBER one litmus test of the GOP.
When WE vote. . . when we are given the franchise - the GOP'S opposition (moderates) will destroy them.
I'm 48. I never thought I would have to worry about my right to vote as a black American - or that of my relatives in GA or AL.
Mr.Linker - is being sneaky and dishonest. The GOP is a bunch of racists and bigots. Fuck that noise of giving their blind hatred of Democracy a platform.
LonePirate
(13,835 posts)Ballots were counted in accordance with the law and only the usual, incredibly insignificant amount of fraud occurred, almost entirely committed by Republicans.
Legitimate voters cast valid votes that were counted properly and produced results that pissed off 45 and led to his sore loser lies about fraud and a lack of election integrity. He repeated his lies frequently due to his desperation and his cultists across the land adopted and believed those lies which has caused this crisis we now face.
We need HR1 and HR4 more than ever - along with additional changes at the state, federal and constitutional level - to ensure all Americans 18 years of age or older can vote and have those votes counted correctly.
global1
(25,836 posts)Fullduplexxx
(8,171 posts)Political views
In its current incarnation, The New Republic has been unambiguously to the left and is often critical of the Democratic establishment and strongly in favor of universal health care.
Goodheart
(5,760 posts)1) You think this voting rights act is flawed. Why don't you get off the fence and submit your own? Let's see what you got.
2) You're opposed to ending the filibuster even if it jeopardizes an infrastructure bill? Why don't you get off the fence and submit your own infrastructure bill? Let's see what you got.