American Politics: The Speaker's Cornered

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

So, how many senators are required to convict and remove him from office?

Like I said, 21 will be needed.

Hold on let me rephrase that question, how many republican senators are required to convict and remove him from office?

[Shrillland]

Like I said, 21 will be needed.

Hold on let me rephrase that question, how many republican senators are required to convict and remove him from office?

Nine. There are 19 Republicans and 12 Democrats, so nine will be needed to convict.

[Cannot think of a name]

This thread's gone on a tangent of pedantry when it's fairly clear that GMS uses "Euro Americans" as a stand-in for "white".

Which makes me cringe because not all Europeans are white skinned and not all non Europeans are not white. There are many southern Europeans who are darker shaded, and there are people not only in the middle east but also across places like east Asia who are pretty close to literally white. Yes, technically there are Americans of European descent, but they're not a racial group. Even in the wacky world of racialism, few people think that everyone in Europe is one race and everyone outside Europe is another.

Well, we draft new white people when the numbers start to go against us. That's how Irish and Italians etc go from 'out group' to 'white'. Under different circumstances we might draft Persians into the club. Jewish people are like Schrodinger's minority. They're either white or the original hate depending on what one needs them to be. Apparently Filipinos who settled in the south bid for whiteness, but it's been a while since I studied all that so I don't have anything to verify that.

Honestly all you need to know about race being some bullshit we made up can be found in the White Draft.

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

Hold on let me rephrase that question, how many republican senators are required to convict and remove him from office?

Nine. There are 19 Republicans and 12 Democrats, so nine will be needed to convict.

given that the house GOP wants to launch him into the sun, it will not be so difficult in my opinion to get those 9.

[Swenfia]

George Washingmachine was a IINO.

bysguvsgbvyvggyvaggaayvaggh
ha ha hahaha

[El Lazaro]

George Washingmachine was a IINO.

A FIABN (Federalist in all but name)? Hmm, if someone can find a more catchy version, maybe it could be a thing. DINO and RINO only, at most, imply someone is part of the other major party. Accusing someone of being loyal or similar to a specific party might be more useful, especially if they’re not in your party or third parties are involved.

[Zurkerx]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

And so the patient continues to huff the dimethylmercury that is "austerity measures"

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

disasterclass from brandon.

[Umeria]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

"Anger progressives who don't want any cuts to social programs" is an interesting way to say "violate the Constitution"

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

"Anger progressives who don't want any cuts to social programs" is an interesting way to say "violate the Constitution"

Lots of amateur constitutionalists questioning the validity of public debt issued by the US government I see.

[Vivida Vis Animi]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

"Anger progressives who don't want any cuts to social programs" is an interesting way to say "violate the Constitution"

What specifically in the constitution is being violated here?

[Umeria]

"Anger progressives who don't want any cuts to social programs" is an interesting way to say "violate the Constitution"

Lots of amateur constitutionalists questioning the validity of public debt issued by the US government I see.

If the supreme court wasn't completely shameless they'd order Biden to invoke the 14th.

[Umeria]

"Anger progressives who don't want any cuts to social programs" is an interesting way to say "violate the Constitution"

What specifically in the constitution is being violated here?

It's essentially a line-item veto which has been ruled unconsitutional

[Haganham]

It is all but certain will anger the far-right... It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats

Well you know what they say about a good compromise.

[Vivida Vis Animi]

What specifically in the constitution is being violated here?

It's essentially a line-item veto which has been ruled unconsitutional

I'm now on a reading rabbit-hole on the Clinton v City of New York history behind this controversy. Thank you for this

[Port Caverton]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

Another GOP W

[Spirit of Hope]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

Another GOP W

A generally small reduction to federal spending that congress can ignore as soon as they want to? I'd hardly call this a win. That's what always gets me about connecting fiscal policy with the debt ceiling, Congress can just write new fiscal policy the next day and ignore whatever they passed when they increased the debt ceiling.

[Port Caverton]

Another GOP W

A generally small reduction to federal spending that congress can ignore as soon as they want to? I'd hardly call this a win. That's what always gets me about connecting fiscal policy with the debt ceiling, Congress can just write new fiscal policy the next day and ignore whatever they passed when they increased the debt ceiling.

I meant the cuts to welfare that likely happened.

[Umeria]

It is all but certain will anger the far-right... It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats

Well you know what they say about a good compromise.

Shooting yourself in the foot is not a good compromise between shooting yourself in the head and simply not firing.

[Shrillland]

It is all but certain will anger the far-right... It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats

Well you know what they say about a good compromise.

That's easy to say for most people, but beyond this lies an abyss of worsening poverty, I will likely lose access to SNAP almost immediately with both the work requirements and the expected federal lifetime limits.

[Spirit of Hope]

A generally small reduction to federal spending that congress can ignore as soon as they want to? I'd hardly call this a win. That's what always gets me about connecting fiscal policy with the debt ceiling, Congress can just write new fiscal policy the next day and ignore whatever they passed when they increased the debt ceiling.

I meant the cuts to welfare that likely happened.

Doesn't sound like there were major cuts to welfare. Some additional work requirements and shortening the time that certain groups can use it. Don't get me wrong those are dumb things that will hurt people, but they aren't going to shake up or change the system.

Hilariously to me one of the actually confirmed cuts is to the IRS, something that was actually going to be revenue generating! Shows you how much the Republican party actually cares about being fiscally conservative.

[Zurkerx]

The White House and the GOP have reached a deal in principal regarding the debt ceiling.

Not all of the details are known, but it would raise the debt ceiling for two years while cutting and capping certain federal programs.

It is all but certain will anger the far-right, who wanted significantly steeper cuts though it's not fully known what programs will see a reduction in spending and which ones are spared. It is likely to anger Progressives and some Democrats too, who don't want any cuts to social programs. Military and veterans’ programs seem to have been spared and most domestic spending will not be hit with a big cut in spending. It is believed a work requirement is in the deal as well, which is something Democrats oppose.

Buckle up all: it's probably going to be a bumpy ride.

Another GOP W

I wouldn't call it a win for the GOP per se, but they did get some things they wanted. Here's some additional details:

According to a person familiar with the agreement, it also would impose new work requirements for some recipients of government aid, including food stamps and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. It would place new limits on the amount of time that certain recipients of food stamps — people under the age of 54, who do not have children — could benefit from the program. But it also would expand food stamp access for veterans and the homeless, said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss details of the package.

The tentative deal also claws back some unspent money from a previous pandemic relief bill, and reduces by $10 billion — to $70 billion from $80 billion — new enforcement funding for the I.R.S. to crack down on tax cheats. It includes measures meant to speed environmental reviews of certain energy projects.

[...]

The deal would impose caps on discretionary spending for two years, though those caps would apply differently to spending on the military than to the rest of the federal budget. Spending on the military would grow next year, as would spending on some veterans’ care. Spending on other domestic programs would fall slightly — or stay roughly flat — compared with this year’s levels.

However, the cuts are only modest and pale in comparison to what some in the GOP wanted:

The final agreement accomplishes their goal, but only modestly. A New York Times analysis of the spending caps at the center of the agreement suggests they will reduce federal spending by about $650 billion over a decade.

Basically, it'll pass the House, but the Senate it seems somewhat iffy. I do think Biden would be off the hook somewhat: he negotiated in what some would call good faith (many on here would say otherwise) and if it fails to pass due to a lack of Republican support (let's face it, Democrats other than Progressives will fall in line), then he can blame them. Already, we see some in the Senate are ready to stall and a revolt will probably come from within the GOP.

Progressives will complain, but I think they will hold their support for Biden overall.

[Zurkerx]

I meant the cuts to welfare that likely happened.

Doesn't sound like there were major cuts to welfare. Some additional work requirements and shortening the time that certain groups can use it. Don't get me wrong those are dumb things that will hurt people, but they aren't going to shake up or change the system.

Hilariously to me one of the actually confirmed cuts is to the IRS, something that was actually going to be revenue generating! Shows you how much the Republican party actually cares about being fiscally conservative.

It's about an eighth of what was to be sent to the IRS: $80 billion was the original; this would cut it by $10 billion (12.5%). A sizable cut, but nowhere near what the GOP wanted, which was basically get rid of the spending entirely. Don't get me wrong, it will weakening the IRS a bit, but not too significantly I feel. Now, if it was 50% or more, than I think Democrats would balk.

The requirements aren't as bad though they will hurt people like Shrill unfortunately. In that case, Democrats better hope to win in 2024 so they can reverse some of those atrocious decisions.

[Shrillland]

Doesn't sound like there were major cuts to welfare. Some additional work requirements and shortening the time that certain groups can use it. Don't get me wrong those are dumb things that will hurt people, but they aren't going to shake up or change the system.

Hilariously to me one of the actually confirmed cuts is to the IRS, something that was actually going to be revenue generating! Shows you how much the Republican party actually cares about being fiscally conservative.

It's about an eighth of what was to be sent to the IRS: $80 billion was the original; this would cut it by $10 billion (12.5%). A sizable cut, but nowhere near what the GOP wanted, which was basically get rid of the spending entirely. Don't get me wrong, it will weakening the IRS a bit, but not too significantly I feel. Now, if it was 50% or more, than I think Democrats would balk.

The requirements aren't as bad though they will hurt people like Shrill unfortunately. In that case, Democrats better hope to win in 2024 so they can reverse some of those atrocious decisions.

A tall order indeed considering the Dems have already lost four seats just from the North Carolina mess.