Friday Talking Points -- Crisis Averted
And so it all ended with a whimper and not a bang. President Joe Biden will sign the bill passed by both houses of Congress to increase the debt ceiling until after the 2024 elections. The bill is a clear victory for Biden, since it contains very little (virtually any) of the initial Republican budget-slashing demands. But Biden couldn't come out and say how good a deal he got from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy until now, because if he had done so it would have fed into the resistance by the farthest-right members of Congress, but now that the bill has safely been passed Biden has scheduled an Oval Office address for later today (7:00 PM, Eastern Time). We should note this is too late for anything he says to be addressed or included here in this column, but we will definitely be watching Biden speak later on today. [Editorial Note: we did listen to Biden's address, and we know it may be hard to believe, but we had picked out our "Crisis Averted" headline before Biden used the phrase tonight.]
All week long, the hurdles were cleared. Over the Memorial Day weekend the deal was announced and then publicly revealed, then after the week began the House voted and the Senate followed. The parliamentary stumbling blocks were easily cleared during the entire process. The most remarkable thing about the week was how downright low-key it was, at least looking back on it. Two party leaders hammered out a deal, both sides claimed it was as good a deal as they were going to get, and then the votes were impressively bipartisan in both houses. In the House, the vote was 314 to 117, with 149 Republicans voting for it (over two-thirds of them). More Democrats voted for it than Republicans, showing that Biden was successful in getting a good deal for his party. The Senate vote was 63 to 36, with only 17 Republicans voting for it, but for these days that's still pretty impressive.
One thing we would bet our bottom dollar will be included in Biden's address tonight: bragging about how he has fulfilled one of his campaign promises in a big way, by bringing bipartisanship back to Washington. Even with divided control of Congress, Biden still got a fairly good deal that all the centrists in both parties wound up supporting. He will doubtlessly present this as a very good thing for the country at large, and he'll mostly be right.
The biggest loser in all of this was the hard-right MAGA/Freedom Caucus faction of the GOP. They didn't get anything they had demanded in the Republicans' opening bid (the bill the House passed which started the negotiations), they weren't able to strongarm McCarthy into blowing up the economy, and they showed that bills can indeed pass the House not only with a majority of Republicans voting for it but also with a whole bunch of centrist Democrats as well. This is (to be polite) not what they had set out to prove in all of this. The hard righties have been largely defanged, and they seemed resigned to how bad it was when they (unsuccessfully) tried to rile everyone up when denouncing the bill, early in the week:
The MAGA Republicans' opposition was categorical. It was also scatological.
Many of the same House GOP extremists who nearly denied Kevin McCarthy the speakership did their utmost this week to tank the bipartisan debt and budget agreement he struck with President Biden.
Rep. Chip Roy (Tex.) wanted colleagues to know "what a turd-sandwich this 'deal' is."
Rep. Dan Bishop (N.C.) told me and other reporters that the hard-liners needed "to fix this s--- sandwich."
Rep. Byron Donalds (Fla.), at a news conference, declared it "crap."
And Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.) said she needed sides and a dessert in order "to eat [this] s--- sandwich."
They were left to whine about not having enough time to read the bill (even though they had a full 72 hours to read only 99 pages), or McCarthy supposedly breaking secret agreements made when he was struggling to become speaker, and in the end were left carping that more Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans did, even though 68 percent of Republicans actually did support it. Embarrassingly, this actually included eight members of the Freedom Caucus, showing they couldn't even prevent defections from within their own ranks. And they seem to be backing down from the calls to oust McCarthy as speaker, because (as usual) they have no actual plan as to how they would do so or who they would support instead. McCarthy actually showed a surprising amount of political strength over the course of the past week (as hard as it is for us to admit that).
But in the end, Biden got more than McCarthy out of the actual deal itself. Republicans started by demanding meat-axe-sized cuts to domestic spending and they wound up with very little. They wanted to lock budget caps in for ten years, and they essentially only got two. They wanted to raise the debt ceiling for only one year, so they could do this all over again during the presidential primaries next spring, and now this won't happen until a new Congress is seated after the elections. And that new Congress will doubtlessly throw everything in this deal out the window and draw up their own budget as their first order of business. So McCarthy got extremely modest cuts while Biden cleared the decks for his own re-election effort without having to give up very much. Even the biggest psychological win for Republicans -- adding some more-stringent work requirements to certain federal programs -- turned out to be a loss, since Biden managed to exempt veterans, the homeless, and recent foster-care children who become adults. All of this will actually increase the number of people the program covers, according to the Congressional Budget Office. And as for those budget caps, both sides are already figuring out ways to get around them (which is par for the course on budget caps, it bears mentioning).
Here is another take on what the two sides managed to get in the deal (emphasis in original):
Recall where this began: the Republican House Freedom Caucus making promises such as repealing much of the Inflation Reduction Act (including eliminating $80 billion in new funds for the Internal Revenue Service), capping nondefense spending at fiscal 2022 levels for a decade and blocking Biden's $400 billion proposed student debt relief. None of that happened.
When factoring in agreed-upon appropriations adjustments, the deal holds nondefense spending essentially flat in fiscal 2024 and increases it by 1 percent in fiscal 2025. According to White House aides, that's a better outcome than a straight continuing resolution.
So it will be interesting indeed how Biden frames the entire thing, when he addresses the nation tonight. But we're still betting he'll be leaning heavily on how he has successfully brought the spirit of bipartisan compromise back to Washington. Where Biden may spike the football a little bit is on his own economic record, after yet another much-better-than-expected jobs report (we'll have more on this in the talking points).
The Republican race to take Biden on in 2024 is heating up, both in rhetoric and in volume. Not that they're shouting at each other, mind you, but rather in the sense of so many of them getting in the race that we saw the first headline of the cycle to use the term: "Republican Clown Car." So take a drink if that was on your Bingo card for this week, we suppose.
This will actually happen next week, as this week had only the pre-announcement announcements from three more Republican contenders: Mike Pence, some guy from North Dakota nobody's ever heard of, and Chris Christie. Christie's announcement will be amusing to watch, since he's scheduled it for next Tuesday -- which also (coincidentally) happens to be the anniversary of D-Day. Talk about some potent symbolism! The forces of democracy and freedom landing and establishing a beachhead against the forces of tyranny and fascism. After all, what better way is there to symbolize taking on Donald Trump?
Christie is quite likely not going to win the GOP nomination, but he could serve in a role he adamantly denied he would play (a few weeks ago) -- that of a "paid assassin." Christie, much more than any other GOP candidate running, has the same bullying nature as Donald Trump and can take a punch on stage while dishing them out in return. So it will be amusing indeed if the two ever face each other on a debate stage (although this is not guaranteed -- Christie might fail to clear the bar the R.N.C. is setting for their debates, and Trump might decline to participate).
The news from the actual campaign trail (with already-announced candidates) is where the rhetoric heated up this week, as Ron DeSantis apparently woke up from a long nap and realized he is actually running against Donald Trump. Up until this week, DeSantis has been trying to run the playbook that Glenn Youngkin ran to become governor of Virginia -- just don't mention Trump and hope everyone doesn't notice. But with DeSantis the only viable threat to Trump in the polling, Trump has been unloading on (as he calls him) "Ron DeSanctimonious" by the truckload, each and every week. This week, DeSantis decided it was time to throw a few punches of his own.
There were many petty little spats in this fray, but the most amusing one to us was a gambit DeSantis tried to play. DeSantis is still mostly avoiding mentioning Trump by name in his stump speeches, but he has been ripping into Trump in the Q-and-A periods afterwards with the press. DeSantis tried a new argument this week that makes a certain degree of sense (seen from his point of view): that he could serve for eight years, while Trump would be term-limited out after only four. Trump, in classic Trump style, taunted this logic by claiming that he could fix everything in only six months -- he wouldn't need eight years to do it. Surprisingly, this time DeSantis shot back, asking Trump if he could fix everything in six months then why didn't he do it in his first four years in office? This type of counterpunching has been entirely absent from the DeSantis campaign, so it was kind of a surprise to hear, and things are only going to get more and more vicious between the two as time goes by. So we've all got that to look forward to!
What else? The debt ceiling fight dominated the political news this week, so not much other news was made, we have to admit. Trump's legal problems continue to get more dire, as first it was leaked that Trump not only hoarded classified documents and showed them off to everyone he felt like, but that his staff may have been complicit in hiding a lot of these from the federal agents who were legally entitled to them. They even held "dress rehearsals" of moving boxes out of the storage room, apparently.
This news was topped by another leak -- that there is an audio recording which was made while Trump was being interviewed for a book, where Trump not only reportedly waved around a highly-secret war plan to attack Iran, but also that Trump knew: (1) that it was still classified and (2) that he could get in trouble for having it or showing it to others. The reports were all secondhand, however -- no media organization has actually heard this recording yet, just a description of what it contains. But Trump musing about how he really should have declassified a document back when he was president totally undermines one of his main legal defenses he's been telegraphing up to this point: that he could mentally declassify any document he wished merely by thinking about it. This could wind up being the smoking gun in the entire mishandling-of-documents case against Trump.
Meanwhile, in news that just has to have rankled Trump, the Department of Justice let Mike Pence's lawyers know that their investigation into classified documents Pence found (and voluntarily turned over) was now closed and nobody would be charged with any crime. We have no doubt that the special counsel investigating Joe Biden will eventually come to the same conclusion, seeing as how what Trump did was so vastly different than what Pence or Biden did.
Outside of Washington, the Texas attorney general was impeached on 20 counts by the state's lower legislative chamber -- which is controlled by Republicans. The vote to impeach was rather overwhelming, too. The legislative session is now over, but the state senate could convene in a special session to hold the trial, so this could get very interesting in the coming weeks. Also, Trump was reportedly not very happy with this outcome, making it all the more delicious.
In New Mexico, the Republican candidate who lost a state house district race and then allegedly went berserk and joined in a conspiracy with two other men to shoot up the houses of the Democrats who certified his loss, was charged this week with conspiracy, interference of elections, and "several firearms offenses that include the use of a machine gun." At least three of these shootings were at houses where children were inside, one of them as young as 10 years old. Pushing the Big Lie of "rigged elections" can be dangerous stuff, folks, in the hands of unstable Republicans.
And speaking of unstable Republicans, we have this charming story to end upon:
Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) got a strong rebuke from the White House on Friday for a tweet she posted on Thursday that was critical of the president's plan to combat hate, bias and violence against Jewish people.
After Joe Biden announced the first U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, the Colorado congresswoman took to Twitter to suggest that any plan to target hate was actually a plan to target conservatives. She added, "Their tactics are straight out of the USSR's playbook."
Many Twitter users rebuked Boebert and noted that her comments suggested bigotry was a big part of the conservative mindset.
On Friday, White House Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates also criticized Boebert's tweets in a statement to HuffPost.
"Congresswoman Boebert is mistaken; antisemitism is not 'conservative' -- it is evil," Bates said. "President Biden is standing up for a bedrock American value that goes beyond politics and is embraced by liberals, conservatives and independents: That we are better than antisemitism and hate. Those vile forces fly in the face of what America represents."
Bates said anyone who "finds opposition to hate threatening" needs "to look inward."
He also suggested Boebert Google the Soviet Union's long, repulsive history of antisemitism.
"She might find a result for Joe Biden, who at the time decried antisemitic acts by Soviet communists as 'shameful,'" Bates said.
In a very quiet sort of unassuming way, President Joe Biden saved the country from the nightmare of defaulting on its obligations this week. Unlike his predecessor, Biden conducted his negotiations in private with the opposition leader. Biden did not flood the zone with tweets, there were no playground insults, he did not whine and moan to the cameras on a daily basis, and he did not attempt to take all the credit at the end of the process.
In other words, he did exactly what 81 million people elected him to do: not be Donald Trump.
Biden did not roll over in the face of Republican bluster. He did not give away the store. He got a much better deal, in fact, than the one Barack Obama was willing to cut in the last debt ceiling hostage standoff. Neither the Republicans nor the press truly cares all that much about the deficit these days (as was decidedly not the case, back in Obama's time), and this fundamental unseriousness undercut McCarthy's bargaining position from the beginning.
McCarthy wound up with a deal that more Democrats in the House voted for than Republicans. But to his credit, he did almost perfectly match the number he had apparently committed to (reports before the vote were that McCarthy was promising 150 GOP "yea" votes; in the end he delivered 149 of them).
The deal delivered exactly zero of the extremist wish list the Republicans had passed at the start of the negotiation. Biden's signature Inflation Reduction Act was not overturned, Biden was not forced to jettison his attempt to cancel student loan debt (more on that in a moment), and the entire deal really only covers the next two years, not the next ten. All in all, a solid win for Democrats, given the fact that the Republicans control the House.
As we've already mentioned, the outcome of the negotiations and the votes in both chambers of Congress are going to allow Biden to frame the entire exercise as a fulfillment of one of his main campaign promises: the center held. The hardline partisans on both the left and right wound up voting against the deal, but the large majority of centrists in the middle prevailed. Biden may offer up some hopeful words tonight about the possibility of this happening again in the next year or so, but we'll all have to wait and see.
For now, though, Biden saved the day. America will not be defaulting on its debt next week. The world's financial markets will not go haywire. There will not be a global recession or depression due to Republican hostage-taking. And the federal budget emerged largely intact, with no Draconian cuts to be seen anywhere.
For accomplishing all this while keeping a very low profile, President Joe Biden was easily the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week. And for good measure, one endearing moment showed us why so many millions of Americans voted for him. During a ceremony at the White House this week, a child began audibly crying while Biden was speaking. Biden's response? "That's OK, she's allowed to do anything you want. Kids rule in my house." When the child continued to cry, Biden addressed the toddler: "What's the matter? What's the matter? I don't blame you; I'm bored with me too." Which is exactly what we voted for when we elected him: a return to a president who can feeling comfortable being downright boring.
[Congratulate President Joe Biden on his official contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]
Biden did, however, fall down on the job this week [...pause for laughter...].
Which leads us to wonder: is anyone else missing late-night comedy as much as we are? (Sigh....)
Joe Biden, after giving the commencement speech at the Air Force Academy, stumbled over a sandbag on the stage and fell down. He was fine, he was helped back up and it was no big deal, but it certainly wasn't the image the White House wanted from the ceremony. Biden did joke later on that he had been "sandbagged," showing he is fine with a bit of self-depreciating humor (something else Trump could never manage to do).
Kidding aside, we do have two Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week awards to hand out, and one we really want to hand out (but can't, if we strictly stick to the rules).
This week, shamefully, the Senate passed a bill which would repeal President Biden's plan to forgive either $10,000 or $20,000 of student loans. The bill had passed the Republican House, but the Democrats actually hold the upper chamber so Republicans never would have gotten to even 50 votes without some help. Two Democrats and one former Democrat gave them this help: Senators Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, and Jon Tester. Of course, 52 votes is nowhere near enough votes to overturn a veto, so this entire exercise was merely designed to embarrass Biden. The student loan forgiveness program may get (ahem) sandbagged by the Supreme Court in the upcoming weeks, but for these three that wasn't even enough. They had to join with the Republicans just to give Biden a political black eye.
Which is beyond disappointing, really. Since Sinema is now an Independent, however, we can only rightfully give the MDDOTW award out to Manchin and Tester. Thanks for nothing, guys....
[Contact Senator Joe Manchin on his Senate contact page, and Senator Jon Tester on his Senate contact page, to let them know what you think of their actions.]
Volume 709 (6/2/23)
By the time you read this, President Biden will have already addressed the nation from the Oval Office. Our talking points will either have been used in some form, or not. They are comprised of what we expect Biden to say, what we would like to hear him say, and what he will almost certainly say. But just to warn everyone, they'll already be superseded by whatever Biden did actually say.
Most of these aren't even about the debt ceiling/budget deal at all. Democratic presidents seem to have a curse on them, because they continually produce a much better economy than when Republicans are running things, but Republicans (aided by a doom-and-gloom mainstream media) are so much better at convincing everyone that things are truly terrible under Democratic rule and peachy-keen under a Republican. So the public mood never seems to match what is truly good economic news. But since Joe Biden is about to run for re-election, he's really going to have to do a better job making this case.
Biden's bipartisan win
This will doubtlessly be a big theme of Biden's address.
"When I ran for president, I promised to bring back the spirit of bipartisanship to Washington, and all the pundits scoffed that it just wasn't possible anymore. So far, I have actually achieved this a number of times on very large pieces of legislation which have invested in America in numerous ways. Today I am happy to announce that even though one house of Congress is in the other party's hands right now, we can still come together and meet in the middle to do what is right for the American people. In doing so, we will lose some votes from both sides, but the large majority of Congress realizes that you can't always get everything you want and that compromise is not a dirty word. I look forward to working with the leaders of Congress in the future to solve more problems in this bipartisan fashion."
Drive a stake through its heart
Biden really should publicly call for this, even if it is impossible with a Republican House.
"This entire exercise was nothing short of playing Russian roulette with the American economy. It is hostage-taking, plain and simple. Republicans threatened to tank the entire world's economy, if I didn't go along with the most extreme budget cuts you can imagine. This is wrong -- this is not how America should debate partisan ideas for the budget. So I am calling on Congress to abolish the debt ceiling forever in their next budget, by passing a law that says whatever spending is appropriated includes issuing whatever debt is necessary to spend that amount of money. If Congress doesn't act, I may -- because the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution means that the entire idea of a debt ceiling is unconstitutional on its face. No president -- whether me or someone else -- should ever have to go through this hostage-taking ever again. I call on Congress to abolish the debt ceiling and stop playing these dangerous games with the full faith and credit of the United States."
Jobs, jobs, jobs
The rest of these talking points are all on the economy, and thus are tangential to what Biden will say -- but we would bet at least a few of these make it into his remarks, as most of them come from a helpful statement the White House put out earlier today.
"Since I took office, America has created over 13 million jobs. That is more jobs created in 28 months than any other president in American history managed to create in four full years. America has recovered from the COVID pandemic slump, and even with all the doom and gloom from economists, more jobs than ever have been created in record time."
Best unemployment in 60 years
Another bragging point for Biden to make.
"The unemployment rate has now stayed below four percent for 16 months in a row. That is astonishingly good news -- it is the first time this has happened since the 1960s, in fact. Jobs are plentiful, and more people are working. If they don't like the job they're in, they feel a lot freer to look around for something better. That is a real success story for tens of millions of American workers."
Inflation keeps going down
These aren't just possible talking points for tonight's address, they will also be core points Biden will no doubt be making out on the campaign trail as well.
"Inflation spiked after the pandemic recession, but it has now fallen for 10 straight months. It is still too high, but it keeps coming down, so the trend is in the right direction. From its peak last summer, inflation has fallen by more than 40 percent. If everything continues to go well, by this time next year it'll be back down to two percent or less, where it should be."
Wages up
Biden deserves to lean in hard to his economic achievements.
"Take-home pay for workers has gone up while inflation has come down as well. Even when you factor in inflation, wages still went up for workers, including those at the lowest end of the pay scale. That is a big deal, folks, since wages at the low end have been stagnant for decades -- far too long. I promised to build this economy from the bottom up, and that is exactly what has happened."
Recession fears fade
Biden has been beating expectations his entire term, so it's time to point it out.
"Economists have been predicting a recession is right around the corner for a very long time now. Each and every month we hear that we could enter into a recession real soon now. The parade of doom and gloom has been rather astonishing. But you know what else is even more astonishing? They have not been right. According to them, we either should be in a recession now or have already gone through one that started last year. Neither happened. Let me repeat that: It did not happen. With each month of positive economic data -- that usually is a lot better than the professional forecasters had guessed -- the fears of a recession seem to get pushed out later and later. But two-and-a-half years into my first term, they have yet to call this one right. Just something to keep in mind the next time you hear an 'expert' predicting that a recession is just around the next corner, folks."
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
I'm kinda partial to the title of TP#2! :-)
But, I doubt you'll ever hear those words about the 14th amendment from Biden. In fact, I think he secretly hopes there will be yet another such crisis to avert before he leaves the White House. Yeah! That's how much he loves bipartisanship. Heh.
Biden deserves to lean in hard to his economic achievements.
Why do Dems in general not lean hard into their tax and fiscal policies and stand them up against the Republican cult of economic failure.
I just don't get it. :(
[2]
I suspect Dems “suck” at economics messaging is because 40 years ago the Dem Donor Class decided that they, too, like Reaganomic’s tax cuts and through bleeping Clinton and Obama have deliberately failed to point out the insanity of trickle down.
Caddy,
I think you may be right about that.
But, what really gets me is the apparent conventional wisdom that says Republicans are better at economic policy than are the Democrats. And, that simply is not the case. Which is why I can't seem to stop pushing the Republican cult of economic failure line. :)
Elizabeth Miller[2]: Re: "Why do Dems in general not lean hard into their tax and fiscal policies and stand them up against the Republican cult of economic failure."
First and foremost, these Friday Talking Points are intended (I hope) to guide Democrats to do a more effective job of boasting about their accomplishments.
Secondly, too many poor and working-class Americans regularly vote against their own economic interests. Case in point is the 'claw backs' that are included in the debt-ceiling deal that just became law. One of the line items that will be canceled was to provide high-speed internet to rural communities, i.e. riders of the "Trump Train" and before that "Tea Party" members.
I whole-heartedly agree with your choice of MIDOW, Chris. Like many progressives, I hoped another candidate would win the Democratic primaries in 2020 and was fearful that Biden would compromise too much and too often.
The debt ceiling deal is the latest example of Biden's genius in "getting it done" despite the razor-thin Democratic majority in the Senate and, until this year, in the House.
Biden continues to defy the (very low) expectations of the chattering classes. For a while now, I've scrolled past any article that suggests Biden is "low energy" or "too old" or even hints that he's inept or a pushover. I'm entirely happy to eat crow so long as Joe Biden continues to astonish those who count him out.
And, I continue to be disappointed by my (very high) expectations of a Biden presidency. So, there you go.
[7]
Why? How has Uncle Joe earned anything less than a B+/A-?
Leave Ukraine out of it — you are misinformed and you stubbornly refuse to engage any Weigantian about the subject, and I’ve given up trying to reach you. Let’s talk about the other stuff.
Re "Over 13 million jobs created."
Weren't those more like 'resurrected' jobs rather that "creeated" jobs? Once the Dempanic passed on, the jobs came back on their own.
Re "inflation keeps going down."
That's utter nonsense. The RATE OF INFLATION (GROWTH) that's going down, it's damn well NOT prices that are going down. Prices are still going UP every gawdam day, just not quite as fast as yesterday or last week.
@stucki,
this is true. slow, gradual inflation is generally a good thing for people with mortgages and such. it's the hyperinflation of weimar germany or 1990's ukraine for example, which we need to avoid.
JL
I didn't want Big Money Joe to be president, but I have to admit that he has dramatically exceeded my expectations. He started playing rope-a-dope with the GQP during the state of the speech and wound up routing them on the new budget deal.
This is worth watching:
incredibly good job
It's better to have serious people on your team than performance artists and liars.
Remember, Caddy ... my expectations of Biden were sky high to begin with.
Okay, so leaving aside agree-to-disagree-on-Ukraine what did expect versus what Joe delivered?
Joe has always pitched his tent in the ideological middle of the Democratic Party (see 1994 mass incarceration Joe) and thank heaven that he’s followed the more recent (transformative) iteration of it.
I started with considerably lower expectations than you say you did but it seems I like what he’s done more than you, Elizabeth. Bleep Clinton and Obama at least the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party finally won the presidency!
Leaving aside his position on the political spectrum, a major weakness of Obama's presidency was his lack of experience at a national level. A stint as VP to, say, Clinton or Biden would probably have made him a more effective eventual president. (Alternative reality: 8 years of Clinton or Biden with VP Obama, followed not by Trump but by Obama.)
Of course fresh blood is always needed in politics and in government and sometimes it's time to throw the rascals out, but the mixture of inexperience,incompetence and extreme ideology (mainly from the right) in Congress for the past several years is appalling. On the other hand, it has at least meant they are too incompetent to do their worst.
The newer Dems, on the other hand, mostly show signs of learning how to navigate the realities of governance in order to get closer to what they believe in, and have had effective, experienced mentors in governance to learn from.
Caddy,
I thought Biden's speech the other night after the ongoing, never-ending debt crisis was averted once again was great!
How the media and some Dems like Schumer are talking about it, not so much. They still don't get what bipartisanship is all about. And, Biden can talk until he's blue in the face and they never will. Oh, well ... perhaps, after a second term, Biden will have had more luck in pushing that idea forward.
Want another debt limit crisis? Vote the Republican cult of economic failure!
Another TP might be: the days of effective divided government are over, if they ever were in the first place!
Meanwhile, still not enough weapons for Ukraine to mount the winter/spring/summer counteroffensive ... fall offensive, anyone!
Caddy,
To give my disappointment with Biden more clarity, his failure to avoid war in Ukraine and the consequential negative impacts this war has had on some existential challenges facing the globe - like, for example, climate change and energy policy - is the overarching reason for my disappointment.
Am I still over the moon that he is POTUS and, with some luck, will be until 2029? Hell, YES!!! :)
But Elizabeth, the only thing Joe could have done to stop the war is…wait a minute…nothing!
Because Joe doesn’t control either Russia nor Ukraine. When the invasion began few (especially Russia) thought the war would last for more than a handful of weeks, so Joe telling Ukraine they were on their own would essentially hand Ukraine over to occupation.
You think that Joe publicly (and privately) ruling out Ukrainian membership in NATO would have stopped the invasion. But this war was always going to happen because this is the last time Russia has the manpower to try and reestablish the Soviet Union-like buffer states all around its perimeter. This has been their strategy for centuries now. Ukraine never was the final objective it’s just on the way to Poland and Romania. You know, NATO allies whom we’d have to defend BTW
Joe did what he could to stop Putin and has done a masterful job of rallying support for the good guys in this matter.
JSYK I think this song sums up Putin’s attitude towards Ukraine.
You think that Joe publicly (and privately) ruling out Ukrainian membership in NATO would have stopped the invasion.
No, I actually don't think that.
But, I do believe that Biden taking Ukrainian membership in NATO "off the table" guaranteed that we would never know if leaving it open for discussion would have avoided war and paved the way for a resolution to the situation in Ukraine before Feb 24th without destroying the country and Ukrainian lives.
The US has been itching to expand NATO right up to the Ukraine-Russia border for decades. Hey, I was all for NATO expansion but there is a limit to the effectiveness of the expansion and a point where it does more harm than good. As is being demonstrated very clearly now.
Of course, now, all bets are off for how large NATO can or needs to be. Chalk it up to another of Putin's unwise moves and miscalculations.
And, Biden's talk of regime change at the Kremlin didn't help matters any, either. ;)
Especially considering that this war will only end by way of the, ah, negotiating table. Ahem.
CW
Biden did not roll over in the face of Republican bluster.
I'm not surprised that Joe kept quiet while silently rolling the GOP, but I must say I'm really surprised I haven't heard more discussion about the huge golden nugget that Trump gifted Biden regarding the entire issue.
He did not give away the store.
The minute Trump dropped that threat basically claiming ownership of any default for Republicans, Biden didn't have to give them very much at all:
*
Trump then "predicted" a default wouldn't happen because "the Democrats would absolutely cave."
Why should they cave? Dumbass Donald just tied a default around the neck of Republicans unless "massive cuts" were made. All Biden had to do was keep saying I can't deliver the votes for the kind of "massive cuts" to Americans that Donald Trump is demanding so you have two choices:
(1) follow Trump's orders
(2) lower your expectations.
Neither the Republicans nor the press truly cares all that much about the deficit these days (as was decidedly not the case, back in Obama's time), and this fundamental unseriousness undercut McCarthy's bargaining position from the beginning.
Trump hanging the blame around the neck of the GOP unless there were "massive cuts" didn't help McCarthy either. It's hysterical how Trump keeps bragging how he's this great negotiator. *shakes head* "I can end that war in 24 hours," says Trump... who might as well be saying: "I think Americans are a bunch of stupid people."
The Democrats should be able to get a lot of mileage out of that "massive cuts" or "do a default" quote from Donald Trump; the commercials practically write themselves. :)
John From Censornati
11
This is worth watching:
incredibly good job
It's better to have serious people on your team than performance artists and liars.
Definitely worth watching. There are far too many in the GOP who cannot govern because they are demonstrably "not serious people," and on that subject, I have some words of advice to offer those nonserious GOP MAGAts and morons:
* If you've spent months and months mocking Joe Biden as "senile" but now somehow find yourself whining and wondering how you got outsmarted by him, that makes you the doddering old fool.
* If you've expended a considerable amount of time insisting the debt ceiling bill is excrement stuffed between bread but then subsequently voted to pass it, you need never wonder why Americans are convinced you're full of shit.
* You're repeatedly defining yourselves.
Elizabeth Miller
16
I thought Biden's speech the other night after the ongoing, never-ending debt crisis was averted once again was great!
It was pretty dang good. Biden displays himself above the fray while allowing his surrogates to handle the political dirty work.
How the media and some Dems like Schumer are talking about it, not so much.
What!? It's classic political "good cop/bad cop" -- Negotiation 101 -- wherein the negotiating never ceases and words spoken today are an obvious downpayment for tomorrow's next incessant negotiations. The Democrats are getting better at this every day. That whole "if I knew then what I know now" concept seems to be paying off. Biden has learned to roll these morons, and for all Trump's bloviating BS, Poor Donald obviously doesn't have clue.
They still don't get what bipartisanship is all about. And, Biden can talk until he's blue in the face and they never will.
They're Biden's surrogates, Elizabeth. It's their job to get down in the mud and rub the others' noses in it so Biden doesn't have to. There are a great many Lefties I know who have spent decades longing to see it. :)
MtnCaddy
22
JSYK I think this song sums up Putin’s attitude towards Ukraine.
Have to admit I was not expecting the J5 there, but yes that absolutely nails it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Then you try to say you're leaving me
And I always have to say no
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Way to not miss the forest for the trees. Obviously, not unlike Joe Biden, you're not overly preoccupied with minor details and Putin's obvious pretexts regarding Ukraine that so easily distract (by design) others. :)
Elizabeth Miller
23
But, I do believe that Biden taking Ukrainian membership in NATO "off the table" guaranteed that we would never know if leaving it open for discussion would have avoided war and paved the way for a resolution to the situation in Ukraine before Feb 24th without destroying the country and Ukrainian lives.
Biden took nothing of the sort "off the table" but definitely reiterated the sovereignty of Ukraine and their right to make those decisions for themselves but also that the United States would not appease Vladimir Putin by undermining a policy enshrined in NATO's original 1949 treaty (wherein a 6-year-old Biden had no input) that grants any European nation (obviously, including Russia) the right to ask to join NATO.
Fast forward to now wherein Russia had obviously already been engaged at war with Ukraine since 2014 when Ukrainians ran Putin's puppet, Viktor Yanukovych, out of office (regime change) and into exile in Russia, whereupon Putin declared it a coup and used it as a pretext to invade Ukraine in order to "protect." Fast forward to now and Putin wants to expand his ongoing war to include -- wait for it -- regime change of Kyiv in order to "protect" it from "Nazis." Is anyone besides MtnCaddy and me seeing a pattern here?
The US has been itching to expand NATO right up to the Ukraine-Russia border for decades.
NATO has been itching to expand NATO into every European nation including Russia since 1949. Also relevant: Before expanding his preexisting war on Ukraine, Putin recited a revisionist history laundry list of Russian grievances and declared that Ukraine doesn't actually exist. In point of fact, Kyiv actually predates Moscow as a major political and cultural influence by approximately 600 years.
Hey, I was all for NATO expansion but there is a limit to the effectiveness of the expansion and a point where it does more harm than good. As is being demonstrated very clearly now.
Russia has already been at war with Ukraine under false pretext since 2014. Somebody fell hard for Vladimir's latest ridiculous pretext to expand said ongoing war since the ouster of Putin's man in Kyiv, and now here we are. I don't blame you but rather that moron you're so fond of who frequently spews right-wing talking points and totally misses the big picture. :)
@kick,
2014 is just the beginning of the hot war period. By that time Putin had already been waging political, economic and information warfare for a decade. He's been pretty consistent about escalating any time he doesn't entirely get his way.
Kick,
Stop wasting my time.
nypoet22
31
2014 is just the beginning of the hot war period. By that time Putin had already been waging political, economic and information warfare for a decade.
Totally correct, dead on accurate, 100% fact, exactly this.
He's been pretty consistent about escalating any time he doesn't entirely get his way.
Demonstrably... so the Ukrainians overthrow of the Russian regime in what Putin admittedly views as Russian territory is what is actually unacceptable to him, to the point that he's willing to wage bloody and costly war because of it, which if successful adds an additional four actual NATO member nations on what would then become (what Putin already perceives as) Russia's Western border, namely: Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania, and which would be (quite obviously) a self-fulfilling self-contradictory paradox wherein Putin achieves the very scenario he claims as a pretext to further escalation of his "hot war" in Ukraine.
Elizabeth Miller
32
Stop wasting my time.
Since you seem intent on confessing to everyone that it's little ol' me who actually controls your time, that illustrates quite a lot without me having to explain a thing.
In conclusion regarding the issue of "my time," I regret to inform you that I will continue to post however I please because there isn't a day of any week, an hour of any day, or even a single second of any hour where you actually control mine. :)
Fine.
@kick,
Precisely, you hit it right on the nose, Putin views all these nations (and the 3 Baltic states too) as parts of Russia that have gone rogue and need to be brought back. There's no "negotiation" with that point of view, because anything he agrees to will only last until his next opportunity to take more.
So, it seems the overarching opinion on what to do about the security situation in Europe revolves around regime change in Moscow. Putin's views have been long held and oft reported. Less attention has been paid to how the US and its allies have responded since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Joshua,
How does this war in Ukraine end without negotiation?
@liz,
Ending the war will certainly involve negotiation, so the question is rhetorical. The real question is what conditions are necessary for real, meaningful negotiation to be possible for both sides. If i understand things correctly, your position is that it was possible prior to 2022, and the present Russian escalation is evidence that it wasn't effectively tried.
My position is that good faith negotiation was attempted by multiple administrations, and a resolution was not possible primarily because Putin's minimum requirements were incompatible with the existence of a free and independent Ukraine.
Not sure how you assess "good faith negotiations" when successive US administrations have not only entertained the notion that NATO expansion through Ukraine was a good idea but have consistently acted toward that end.
Again, I have nothing against NATO expansion, per se. But, it just doesn't make any security sense for it to expand to Ukraine.
Ukraine could have been free and independent enough OUTSIDE of NATO without any NATO bases on its territory. In fact, the great Zelensky, himself, said as much early on in this war.
Elizabeth Miller
37
So, it seems the overarching opinion on what to do about the security situation in Europe revolves around regime change in Moscow.
My point (and as I interpret JL's) was that Putin gets his knickers in a twist and escalates whenever there is regime change in what he perceives already belongs to "Moscow," specifically in this instance, the sovereign nation of Ukraine... but (obviously) also multiple other nations. See "Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik"... or what we North Americans refer to as "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics."
I believe regime change in Moscow is the decision of the Russian people and certainly not mine... in the same manner I believe regime change in Kyiv is Ukrainians' decision and certainly not Putin's.
Putin's views have been long held and oft reported.
You should seriously pay more attention to those views and demands.
Less attention has been paid to how the US and its allies have responded since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Certainly not by you. Your oft repeated issue regarding the most recent escalation of war by Putin is how Biden and the United States have acted in order to facilitate it, and you're stubborn in your assertion that JRBJ somehow took something off the table during negotiations held in attempting de-escalation. You are incorrect.
As Putin amassed 100,000 troops within striking distance of Ukraine's borders while simultaneously insisting there were no plans to invade, a treaty of Moscow's demands (spelled out in full) was released by the foreign ministry of Russia.
What you need to (finally) understand is that Biden took nothing "off the table" just because it was included in Putin's laughable laundry list of demands full of multiple pretexts for de-escalation of an ongoing war he'd already escalated.
If Putin (or any nation) wishes to dictate orders regarding the sovereign nations that may/may not become part of NATO, he'll first have to become part of NATO. That's the whole idea of NATO... since inception.
nypoet22
39
Ending the war will certainly involve negotiation, so the question is rhetorical.
Exactly! All that. Very well said.
Russia is (and has been for centuries) an aggressive imperialist power. The "Open Door Policy" of NATO is a viable counterbalance for a European nation wishing to seek entry for its defense; any sovereign nation of Europe may ask to become part of NATO: Ukraine, Finland, Sweden, et alia, etcetera.
Biden didn't take anything "off the table" just because Putin demanded it. Putin's "minimum requirements" were ultimatums. Ultimatums ain't diplomacy. :)
Elizabeth Miller
40
Not sure how you assess "good faith negotiations" when successive US administrations have not only entertained the notion that NATO expansion through Ukraine was a good idea but have consistently acted toward that end.
Which is relevant to "good faith negotiations" in 2021/2022 in what way? Rhetorical question. It isn't relevant. Your repetitive whining is in regards to Biden somehow taking something "off the table" that, in point of fact, was an ultimatum of Putin's that was never "on the table." See "North Atlantic Treaty" and "Open Door Policy" (Article 10), circa 1949.
Again, I have nothing against NATO expansion, per se. But, it just doesn't make any security sense for it to expand to Ukraine.
It obviously does to Ukraine. You seem to have bought into the utter asinine assumption that Western officials have spent decades proactively strong-arming European sovereign nations into joining NATO.
Did it never occur to you that former Soviet nations and other European nations might have joined in order to shield themselves from Russian aggression? See Budapest, Hungary, revolution circa 1956 and Prague Spring, Czechoslovakia, circa 1968. Do you also think Finland and Sweden have been strong-armed by the West into joining NATO? Or did it perchance cross your mind they might have wished to join in order to defend themselves from Russian aggression?
Ukraine could have been free and independent enough OUTSIDE of NATO without any NATO bases on its territory. In fact, the great Zelensky, himself, said as much early on in this war.
As we've already discussed in prior posts, the "hot war" (props to JL) began with the ouster of Putin's puppet from Kyiv in 2014 and was escalated on Putin's orders in 2021-2022. Around 2014, Zelenskyy was literally doing overdubbing recording for playing the part of Paddington Bear in the movie Paddington, which role he reprised for Paddington 2 in 2017. In 2015, Zelenskyy played the role of President of Ukraine in Servant of the People.
Also, I cannot fathom how you (or anyone) would believe it is remotely possible for any nation to be "free and independent" of Russia if Putin has stated in no uncertain terms that he does not (and will never) recognize the existence of that nation.
So, to recap: Big picture.
Kick,
I will explain one last time.
Your comments in response to mine are a waste of my time to read because they do not demonstrate much of an understanding of what I am trying to communicate.
So, please don't waste anymore of your time or mine until you can discuss with respect and civility and, most importantly, with an understanding of the issue at hand.
Elizabeth Miller
44
I will explain one last time.
Do I have a promise on that? *laughs* Your repetitive postings regarding the issue are ample evidence you should get to know yourself.
Your comments in response to mine are a waste of my time to read because they do not demonstrate much of an understanding of what I am trying to communicate.
OMG! You think it's unclear what you're repetitively communicating on this forum!? *laughs* The teacher who knows his history certainly gets it. The mountain man in Cali by way of Ukraine who knows his history is without question not missing it. In fact, I haven't seen a single comment on this forum from any poster who doesn't clearly understand your point (including me and also posters who are no longer here commenting at the present time). So you might want to reconsider from which side of our Northern border that comprehension problem is emanating. Hint: Blame Canada.
So, please don't waste anymore of your time or mine until you can discuss with respect and civility and, most importantly, with an understanding of the issue at hand.
You are mistaking disagreement with "respect and civility" so in the immortal words of Elizabeth Miller: "Don't waste my time." Just kidding; you cannot and do not (it's not possible). If you continue to blame Joe Biden for Russian aggression regarding the invasion of Ukraine, you're missing the big picture in favor of right-wing drivel and spew. We can agree to disagree on this, but make no mistake, you are understood fully because you're not that complicated.
I also reiterate from my earlier post (and will do so as many times as necessary): I am touched by your confession that it's little ol' me who controls your time. I will also "do you a solid" here and let you in a secrets (not secrets):
TIME: Only you can waste it; it's actually you who controls how you spend it. If you actually believe you can control my posts or my time, then you're seriously wasting your time. :)