• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yep. They have to look both left and right at the same time, so I expect alternating narratives from honey moon lovey dovey to on the rocks romance broken, planted from both sides every 2- 3 weeks from now until November.

    Do you think the House writ large needs to pass another bill before November or was this sufficient to earn their keep?

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      Do you think the House writ large needs to pass another bill before November or was this sufficient to earn their keep?

      do you think there’s nothing that needs attention? no problems that require legislation to solve, no… I don’t know, aid packages to be signed. or relief for anything…?

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m speaking purely in terms of sportsball/ realpolitik, in the most cynical manner possible.

        Like, I can’t think about anything other than funding international war that both Democrats and Republicans agree enough upon to be worth bringing to the floor other than to say you tried and let it die so you can campaign on it.

        I guess my thinking is that this might have been enough for at least the Democrats in the house to run on, if they can keep the Republicans annoyed enough at it being presented as a Democratic victory, and especially if they can point to Republicans revolting against Johnson as to why they can’t get any more done for this session of congress.

        On the Republican side, the passage doesn’t seem like a victory for Republican voters. No real accomplishments other than being able to fund the Israeli genocide. I’m not sure how high that ranks of a priority that is for Republican voters. Like the genocide was fully funded, it didn’t really need the help, so it just doesn’t have the same staying power as funding the Ukrainian resistance does for Democratic voters.

        I guess my thinking is that if we go into November without another single thing getting done in the house, the W for this season goes into the D column, almost certainly. So the need to get more done is mostly going to come from the R side of aisle.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          I guess my thinking is that if we go into November without another single thing getting done in the house, the W for this season goes into the D column, almost certainly. So the need to get more done is mostly going to come from the R side of aisle.

          the issue is that the DNC has become the “Any functioning adult” party. they’re going to take a hit if they vote and congress completely seizes up. better to work someone who won’t try to fuck you over than to get somebody whose going to be worse. and congress will completely seize up.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Toungue in cheek obviously but the point remains. I firmly agree with your point about the Democrats ability to campaign on the “Any functional adult” party, but that goes away if they elevate Republicans the level of ‘also being function adults’. Congress being seized up actually works for the Democrats so long as they can firmly pin it on Republicans, unless its explicitly a Democratic policy priority. Which is like… Maybe? But that works so hard against Johnson and the Republicans in the house; his leash just isn’t that long.

            So my bet goes to stagnation, which I assess as a D’ win. If you think there is something both D’ and R’ can vote yes on going into campaign season, I’m all ears. Maybe marijuana legalization?

            • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              To answer the assassin goose…

              Anything they can get. They’ve got more leverage with Johnson to push whatever agenda they want than they will have with who or whatever comes next.

              (Edit going nuclear with the attack birds, are we? lol. )

              • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Yeah that’s just…

                Abysmal political strategy. Like if you want to lose an election your party is already struggling in (as in, the Democrats are struggling), the Democrats should do exactly what you describe.

                The only things on the table that Republicans are willing to work on are gigantic L’s for the Democrats. There is no issue (unless you have one you are holding back on, and again, maybe mj reform?) that Republicans would put forward that Democratic voters can support.

                If they did what you are advising, Democrats would go from having ‘won’ the house game of the last 2 years (from the minority position no less), to having ‘lost’ the house game. It would be idiotic to give Republicans one iota of rope more than exactly what it takes to hang themselves.

                (Tongue in cheek, I actually appreciate our discussion here.)

                • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  The problem is that people are sick of exactly these games.

                  We want a functional government. Breaking it… because you got the ball and are going home isn’t going to convince any centrists to flip. Progressives also don’t see them doing enough.

                  They don’t have to agree to things. They just need to make as much of an effort. They’ll be more successful to that with someone who won’t move the goalposts every five minutes.

                  We nuke Johnson, they loose a seat at the table. The next guy simply can’t be trusted. Nobody wins.

                  We keep that seat, we can still nuke his plans… or not. It gives them more than they had before.

                  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    any centrists to flip

                    Centrists?

                    This is such a persistent myth about American politics. There is basically no evidence to suggest that a ‘center’ has ever existed outside of being a convenient narrative for NPR to orbit around. You don’t win American elections appealing to ‘centrists’ (who statistically don’t exist), you win them driving out a base. We have a strongly bimodal electorate that has only gotten more and more bimodal since the year 2000.

                    We have 3 demographics in American in order of volume: Independents, Democrats, and Republicans. Democrats, if they want to win, need to drive their base out, and expand it (if possible).

                    No Republican will vote Democratic in this election. The best you can do is get them to stay home. But no quantity of political capitol will bring them to the Democratic side. Its a complete waste of resources.

                    Democrats can only drive out their base (go after policy positions their base wants), or bring in independents (expand to policy positions independents favor). Its just naive to the current environment to promote working with Republicans as a viable path for house Democrats. It would be completely shooting themselves in the foot.

    • SolidGrue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Do you think the House writ large needs to pass another bill before November or was this sufficient to earn their keep?

      Just off the top of my head? FAA reauthorization, FY2025 federal budget package, …oh that pesky temporary stopgap funding measure to re-up this summer, some election integrity bills…

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Just off the top of my head? FAA reauthorization, FY2025 federal budget package, …oh that pesky temporary stopgap funding measure to re-up this summer, some election integrity bills…

        Stop gap, for sure, same with FAA. Not sure election integrity is a ‘need to have’ for the House ‘writ large’. Would be a big feather for Dems, not sure Repubs care.

        I’m still very dubious of the argument in favor of House Dems working with Repubs. Dems have finally wrangle the Repubs onto their heals, and giving out any unnecessary points seems counter productive. I think this because I think, for House Republicans, their biggest issue going into November is that they’ve got absolutely jack shit to show for their time in office, except for a few Democratic wins. From a Dem strategy perspective, it just doesn’t make sense to give the R’s anything to campaign on, and the R’s are extremely desperate for anything.

        I’d rather suffer through a few more months of a do nothing congress, and then sweep the House into a Democratic super majority than offer some fawning victory lap points to only somewhat less extreme Republicans. I think Democrats are well positioned for that, but they need anything that comes out of the House to be a clear Democratic victory. Thoughts?

        • SolidGrue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m still very dubious of the argument in favor of House Dems working with Repubs.

          Compromise starts somewhere, and someone has to go first. Will it be the Dems? Probably. In 2024? Meh. Probably better to not.

          I’d rather suffer through a few more months of a do nothing congress, and then sweep the House into a Democratic super majority

          For the next Congress? Sure, why not? I know who I’m voting for already. I’m not young myself, but I have young adult chikdren. I’d like to see a more progressive agenda for their sake. The best tree is the one you planted 20 years ago. The next best tree is the one you plant today.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            I know who I’m voting for already.

            Yeah I think we’re pretty locked in at this point, at least in regards to preference. Turnout however, I think is completely up in the air. I also agree on just accepting impass at this point. If the Dems see this as an opportunity for bipartisanship, that’s just political suicide. They can cleanly make this a referendum on the very principal of modern republicanism as being obstructionist (worthless house), anti-women (RvW), criminals (Trump on trial). Like its pretty easy. Just go home and campaign.