The Biden Administration..V3

414,004 Views | 6637 Replies | Last: 3 hrs ago by DrummerboyWolf
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
packofwolves
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sounds like some upstanding illegal immigrants coming in via Biden's open border.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-employee-reveals-shocking-conditions-nyc-migrant-hotel-free-for-all
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…

What do you think they should have realistically held out for?

Do you think they should have allowed default, if that's what it took to get what they were gunning for?
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…

What do you think they should have realistically held out for?

Do you think they should have allowed default, if that's what it took to get what they were gunning for?
Yes, default is the answer, 100%!

Scatter those US Federal Reserve Notes into the wind.
https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/dollar-devaluation/
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…

What do you think they should have realistically held out for?

Do you think they should have allowed default, if that's what it took to get what they were gunning for?
Actually, what I'm hearing is that we would have been better off just raising the debit limit, by 1.5 T. Because, based on this deal, we will see a much higher debt increase, then just just increasing the debt limit, with no attachments.

That way, at the presidential election, we can have this debate on how congress is killing, all of us financially. BTW, we will see 1.5T, in increase, within a year, watch…
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here is an analysis from a person that's done this before. BTW, forget who's program this is on and pay attention to the Russ Vought's message…

https://americasvoice.news/video/tlPdPmqr2AfVScP
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And Byron Donald's…


caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And here you go…. It protects all key measurements passed, since Biden has been President. In other words, no CUTS! What does that mean? A continuation of deficits, each year, that adds to our debt. So, both parties are agreeing!



hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
I think it's time for Republicans to take a stand and quit worrying about their next election.

That said, they had a bill, that most conservatives didn't agree with; however, it had a 1.5T debt ceiling increase. The new negotiation does have a cap, at ALL, on the debt. It has a two- year term. Additionally, it is based on the spending, that has been created, over the last two years, of this administration.

By that very fact, if we are seeing a trillion plus in deficits, then we will increase the debt, right? The belief is the saving is less than 50B. They had a bill and should have stuck strong with it. They should have forced the administration to show the default data.

See the following tweet indicating a Rep Massie possible amendment. This is how the government should operate, within our current debt limit…. This is all good; however, it will do nothing, over the next two years, as this bill doesn't have a cap on the debt limit.


caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
McCarthy may need a majority of Democrats to pass this bill…



Is that what you expect out of the Republican (so-called conservative) Party.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is a McCarthy ally…


caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
These are not MAGA people…


caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Just read what she says, in her tweet…


Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Just read what she says, in her tweet…



"Republicans got outsmarted by a President who can't find his pants."

Love how all these people talk "around" the problem........they weren't outsmarted, they know exactly what they're doing. A "slight of hand" move........just like always.
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
You put bad candidates on the ballot, you get what you deserve. The same thing is going to happen in 2024. A sure victory will be snatched by the jaws of defeat because we want to own the libs instead of focusing on the real issue that is "careening the US towards bankruptcy" - entitlements, defense spending, and debt servicing. Neither side wants to address those issues regardless of the theatrics and saber rattling.

Cutting discretionary spending is great and all, it will slow down the rock rolling down the hill, but it's not going to stop it.

Where were these Freedom Caucus folks when in control of the Presidency, House, and Senate from 2016 - 2018 did nothing to decrease spending and actually voted for increases?

Additionally, if the basis for negotiation was using Limit, Save Grow as the baseline, why are they all now disappointed that using that as the baseline did not produce the result they wanted?

This whole thing is about nothing. The House Freedom Caucus wants total surrender from Biden. What world was that going to happen? Certainly not the real one.

If they're serious about this, then the first step is to remove McCarthy as speaker. That should be tomorrow morning's first business. If they don't do that, then you have fallen hook line and sinker for the worst kind of BS - BS that makes you think they care, when they actually don't want to do the hard job of actually being a legislator. And sometimes that means taking a deal that isn't the best or even close to the best and moving forward.

This is what happens when you force out all others for the sake of ideological purity. Eventually, you will no longer be relevant. This is why populism is so dangerous.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Russia will launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike if West provides Ukraine with nukes, Moscow warns | Daily Mail Online
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12127333/Russia-launch-pre-emptive-nuclear-strike-West-provides-Ukraine-nukes-Moscow-warns.html
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
You put bad candidates on the ballot, you get what you deserve. The same thing is going to happen in 2024. A sure victory will be snatched by the jaws of defeat because we want to own the libs instead of focusing on the real issue that is "careening the US towards bankruptcy" - entitlements, defense spending, and debt servicing. Neither side wants to address those issues regardless of the theatrics and saber rattling.

Cutting discretionary spending is great and all, it will slow down the rock rolling down the hill, but it's not going to stop it.

Where were these Freedom Caucus folks when in control of the Presidency, House, and Senate from 2016 - 2018 did nothing to decrease spending and actually voted for increases?

Additionally, if the basis for negotiation was using Limit, Save Grow as the baseline, why are they all now disappointed that using that as the baseline did not produce the result they wanted?

This whole thing is about nothing. The House Freedom Caucus wants total surrender from Biden. What world was that going to happen? Certainly not the real one.

If they're serious about this, then the first step is to remove McCarthy as speaker. That should be tomorrow morning's first business. If they don't do that, then you have fallen hook line and sinker for the worst kind of BS - BS that makes you think they care, when they actually don't want to do the hard job of actually being a legislator. And sometimes that means taking a deal that isn't the best or even close to the best and moving forward.

This is what happens when you force out all others for the sake of ideological purity. Eventually, you will no longer be relevant. This is why populism is so dangerous.
Hokie, I don't give a rats ass who is voting for this deal. If they vote yes on this, then they all should be primaried! First and foremost, in 2016-2018, the majority of those people were Paul Ryan Republicans. That said, who, in the Republican Party do you even like?

How about Mike Lee?


jkpackfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
You put bad candidates on the ballot, you get what you deserve. The same thing is going to happen in 2024. A sure victory will be snatched by the jaws of defeat because we want to own the libs instead of focusing on the real issue that is "careening the US towards bankruptcy" - entitlements, defense spending, and debt servicing. Neither side wants to address those issues regardless of the theatrics and saber rattling.

Cutting discretionary spending is great and all, it will slow down the rock rolling down the hill, but it's not going to stop it.

Where were these Freedom Caucus folks when in control of the Presidency, House, and Senate from 2016 - 2018 did nothing to decrease spending and actually voted for increases?

Additionally, if the basis for negotiation was using Limit, Save Grow as the baseline, why are they all now disappointed that using that as the baseline did not produce the result they wanted?

This whole thing is about nothing. The House Freedom Caucus wants total surrender from Biden. What world was that going to happen? Certainly not the real one.

If they're serious about this, then the first step is to remove McCarthy as speaker. That should be tomorrow morning's first business. If they don't do that, then you have fallen hook line and sinker for the worst kind of BS - BS that makes you think they care, when they actually don't want to do the hard job of actually being a legislator. And sometimes that means taking a deal that isn't the best or even close to the best and moving forward.

This is what happens when you force out all others for the sake of ideological purity. Eventually, you will no longer be relevant. This is why populism is so dangerous.
Lol dude there are only like 35 members of the freedom caucus, no shot they can do anything with those numbers but you knew that.
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jkpackfan said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
You put bad candidates on the ballot, you get what you deserve. The same thing is going to happen in 2024. A sure victory will be snatched by the jaws of defeat because we want to own the libs instead of focusing on the real issue that is "careening the US towards bankruptcy" - entitlements, defense spending, and debt servicing. Neither side wants to address those issues regardless of the theatrics and saber rattling.

Cutting discretionary spending is great and all, it will slow down the rock rolling down the hill, but it's not going to stop it.

Where were these Freedom Caucus folks when in control of the Presidency, House, and Senate from 2016 - 2018 did nothing to decrease spending and actually voted for increases?

Additionally, if the basis for negotiation was using Limit, Save Grow as the baseline, why are they all now disappointed that using that as the baseline did not produce the result they wanted?

This whole thing is about nothing. The House Freedom Caucus wants total surrender from Biden. What world was that going to happen? Certainly not the real one.

If they're serious about this, then the first step is to remove McCarthy as speaker. That should be tomorrow morning's first business. If they don't do that, then you have fallen hook line and sinker for the worst kind of BS - BS that makes you think they care, when they actually don't want to do the hard job of actually being a legislator. And sometimes that means taking a deal that isn't the best or even close to the best and moving forward.

This is what happens when you force out all others for the sake of ideological purity. Eventually, you will no longer be relevant. This is why populism is so dangerous.
Lol dude there are only like 35 members of the freedom caucus, no shot they can do anything with those numbers but you knew that.
but they hold all the leverage!!! Lol, thanks for proving my point.
jkpackfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
You put bad candidates on the ballot, you get what you deserve. The same thing is going to happen in 2024. A sure victory will be snatched by the jaws of defeat because we want to own the libs instead of focusing on the real issue that is "careening the US towards bankruptcy" - entitlements, defense spending, and debt servicing. Neither side wants to address those issues regardless of the theatrics and saber rattling.

Cutting discretionary spending is great and all, it will slow down the rock rolling down the hill, but it's not going to stop it.

Where were these Freedom Caucus folks when in control of the Presidency, House, and Senate from 2016 - 2018 did nothing to decrease spending and actually voted for increases?

Additionally, if the basis for negotiation was using Limit, Save Grow as the baseline, why are they all now disappointed that using that as the baseline did not produce the result they wanted?

This whole thing is about nothing. The House Freedom Caucus wants total surrender from Biden. What world was that going to happen? Certainly not the real one.

If they're serious about this, then the first step is to remove McCarthy as speaker. That should be tomorrow morning's first business. If they don't do that, then you have fallen hook line and sinker for the worst kind of BS - BS that makes you think they care, when they actually don't want to do the hard job of actually being a legislator. And sometimes that means taking a deal that isn't the best or even close to the best and moving forward.

This is what happens when you force out all others for the sake of ideological purity. Eventually, you will no longer be relevant. This is why populism is so dangerous.
And Biden wouldn't even meet with McCarthy for months on this so he was basically wanting total surrender from the pubs. You can't believe everything coming from mainstream media and that goes for Fox as well.
jkpackfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

jkpackfan said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
You put bad candidates on the ballot, you get what you deserve. The same thing is going to happen in 2024. A sure victory will be snatched by the jaws of defeat because we want to own the libs instead of focusing on the real issue that is "careening the US towards bankruptcy" - entitlements, defense spending, and debt servicing. Neither side wants to address those issues regardless of the theatrics and saber rattling.

Cutting discretionary spending is great and all, it will slow down the rock rolling down the hill, but it's not going to stop it.

Where were these Freedom Caucus folks when in control of the Presidency, House, and Senate from 2016 - 2018 did nothing to decrease spending and actually voted for increases?

Additionally, if the basis for negotiation was using Limit, Save Grow as the baseline, why are they all now disappointed that using that as the baseline did not produce the result they wanted?

This whole thing is about nothing. The House Freedom Caucus wants total surrender from Biden. What world was that going to happen? Certainly not the real one.

If they're serious about this, then the first step is to remove McCarthy as speaker. That should be tomorrow morning's first business. If they don't do that, then you have fallen hook line and sinker for the worst kind of BS - BS that makes you think they care, when they actually don't want to do the hard job of actually being a legislator. And sometimes that means taking a deal that isn't the best or even close to the best and moving forward.

This is what happens when you force out all others for the sake of ideological purity. Eventually, you will no longer be relevant. This is why populism is so dangerous.
Lol dude there are only like 35 members of the freedom caucus, no shot they can do anything with those numbers but you knew that.
but they hold all the leverage!!! Lol, thanks for proving my point.
Lmao huh? I said they had no shot of getting anything done in response to your comment about where were they in 2016-2018 and getting nothing done. It's not a big enough caucus
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jkpackfan said:

hokiewolf said:

jkpackfan said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

Rino's folded like a cheap suit…
Better then raising spending, which is what happened from 2016-2020…..
Hokie, you need to do more research. They have put no caps on spending, and no threshold on the debt limit, for this timeframe. It is being said that the debt could increase, and probably will, by 4-5T.

This is complicated stuff.
What exactly is the leverage that the House Republicans had to get a "better deal"? Take the messaging war win and move forward, you're not going to change things overnight.
They hold the House! Republicans always campaign as conservatives; however, rarely govern that way…
Could have had the House and Senate and had real leverage to strike a better deal, but instead they bricked a slam dunk for Senate majority
That's just stupid! They have the house and that's enough. Hokie, don't act like a conservative, libertarian, or whatever and make dumb comments.

I think you are one of the people that says… we can't look backwards, we can only look forward, when discussing election irregularities during the 2020 election. Now, you want to look backwards. Come on man, you're smarter than that.
You put bad candidates on the ballot, you get what you deserve. The same thing is going to happen in 2024. A sure victory will be snatched by the jaws of defeat because we want to own the libs instead of focusing on the real issue that is "careening the US towards bankruptcy" - entitlements, defense spending, and debt servicing. Neither side wants to address those issues regardless of the theatrics and saber rattling.

Cutting discretionary spending is great and all, it will slow down the rock rolling down the hill, but it's not going to stop it.

Where were these Freedom Caucus folks when in control of the Presidency, House, and Senate from 2016 - 2018 did nothing to decrease spending and actually voted for increases?

Additionally, if the basis for negotiation was using Limit, Save Grow as the baseline, why are they all now disappointed that using that as the baseline did not produce the result they wanted?

This whole thing is about nothing. The House Freedom Caucus wants total surrender from Biden. What world was that going to happen? Certainly not the real one.

If they're serious about this, then the first step is to remove McCarthy as speaker. That should be tomorrow morning's first business. If they don't do that, then you have fallen hook line and sinker for the worst kind of BS - BS that makes you think they care, when they actually don't want to do the hard job of actually being a legislator. And sometimes that means taking a deal that isn't the best or even close to the best and moving forward.

This is what happens when you force out all others for the sake of ideological purity. Eventually, you will no longer be relevant. This is why populism is so dangerous.
Lol dude there are only like 35 members of the freedom caucus, no shot they can do anything with those numbers but you knew that.
but they hold all the leverage!!! Lol, thanks for proving my point.
Lmao huh? I said they had no shot of getting anything done in response to your comment about where were they in 2016-2018 and getting nothing done. It's not a big enough caucus
The Freedom caucus isn't enough. It's going to take others to make something happen. Those others are the ones that need to get onboard.

So, if we would have had another 20 seats, this still wouldn't have gotten done. Those people you're asking for (better candidates) are the opposite of the Freedom Caucus. Watch, if this passes, it will take a majority of Democrats, to do so…

The Freedom Caucus does hold a bunch of power. They are going to push McCarthy to get Dems onboard…. There's that bi-partisanship you're looking for, right?
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The people lining up to vote no, know that their votes aren't needed for it to pass... just more of the same.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheStorm said:

The people lining up to vote no, know that their votes aren't needed for it to pass... just more of the same.
Probably some; however, some (at least the ones I support) are principled…. When it's obvious they are no longer principled, that's when I'll start *****ing about them, as well…
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Comical to watch an attempted honest discussion on this topic. Do we really believe that DC is remotely a "Govt by the People for the People"? Can we please come to terms with what we really have?
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf said:

Comical to watch an attempted honest discussion on this topic. Do we really believe that DC is remotely a "Govt by the People for the People"? Can we please come to terms with what we really have?


I've come to terms with that! That's why i'm a blow it up person! A so-called default, notwithstanding…
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's very simple... if the McCarthy deal had ANY of the $2.1 Trillion of cuts/savings they brag about as 'historic', Leadership would have kept in the CAP on the debt ceiling. Heck, even raise the CAP from $1.5 Trillion BUT PUT IN A CAP!! These guys think YOU are stupid!!

They know their 'cuts' are ALL optics and the TELL, TELL is NO CAP ON DEBT CEILING FOR 2 YEARS!!!
First Page Last Page
Page 148 of 190
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.