Official LRC President Joseph R Biden Thread

---

agip wrote:

---

Hambo wrote:

---

Well, ok then! wrote:

---

Not CNN wrote:

---

Well, ok then! wrote:

---

Hambo wrote:
Not a peep from dementia Joe about mlb choosing to have the all star game in a state with MORE restrictive voting laws than Georgia.

---

Colorado voting laws are far less restrictive than Georgia's.

Over 99% of votes in Colorado are cast via mail or drop box so comparing the states solely on the basis of days of early voting site availability as Gov Kemp and Sen Scott have done is beyond silly.

Despite it's not being a swing state in the 2020 presidential election, Colorado had the second highest voter participation rate of all states.

---

Does Colorado require some sort of Jim Crow on steroids voter ID?

---

Again, Colorado had the second highest voter participation rate of all 50 states in the 2020 election.

---

and they have MORE restrictive voting laws. Go figure.

---

that's an absurdly false statement
for one, CO sends a ballot in the mail to every registered voter
that alone shows you are making stuff up

https://coloradosun.com/2021/04/06/voting-laws-georgia-colorado/

---

---

agip wrote:

---

Hambo wrote:

---

Well, ok then! wrote:
Again, Colorado had the second highest voter participation rate of all 50 states in the 2020 election.

---

and they have MORE restrictive voting laws. Go figure.

---

that's an absurdly false statement
for one, CO sends a ballot in the mail to every registered voter
that alone shows you are making stuff up

---

---

Monkeys Skyping wrote:

---

agip wrote:

---

Hambo wrote:

---

Well, ok then! wrote:
Again, Colorado had the second highest voter participation rate of all 50 states in the 2020 election.

---

and they have MORE restrictive voting laws. Go figure.

---

that's an absurdly false statement
for one, CO sends a ballot in the mail to every registered voter
that alone shows you are making stuff up

---

Hambo's just repeating the GOP narrative whether as an uncritical foot soldier or troll I can't say.

The GOP could be self consistent and argue that absentee voting as almost universally used in Colorado isn't sufficiently secure, but acknowledging a fundamentally different and more convenient approach to voting would introduce actual nuance which seems to confuse the base.

---

---

Sally Vix wrote:

---

Sally Vix wrote:

---

Fat hurts wrote:

---

Trollminator wrote:

---

Hambo wrote:
Frightening how rational thought goes out the window.

---

Like when you blindly believed in and worshipped the NY orange-makeup wearing crybaby conman.

---

Or when you deny the greenhouse effect. This is a process that has been known to science since the Lincoln administration.

And if we don't do something about it, we will have crop failure that will result in the end of humanity. That's why this jobs and infrastructure bill is the most important legislation of our lifetime.

---

LOL. I don't think Abe cared too much about a made-up Global Warming crisis. He was too busy freeing the effing slaves!

---

Fat Hurts declaring the end of humanity. Priceless.

---

---

Hambo wrote:

---

Sally Vix wrote:

---

Sally Vix wrote:

---

Fat hurts wrote:

---

Trollminator wrote:

---

Hambo wrote:
Frightening how rational thought goes out the window.

---

Like when you blindly believed in and worshipped the NY orange-makeup wearing crybaby conman.

---

Or when you deny the greenhouse effect. This is a process that has been known to science since the Lincoln administration.

And if we don't do something about it, we will have crop failure that will result in the end of humanity. That's why this jobs and infrastructure bill is the most important legislation of our lifetime.

---

LOL. I don't think Abe cared too much about a made-up Global Warming crisis. He was too busy freeing the effing slaves!

---

Fat Hurts declaring the end of humanity. Priceless.

---

...again.

This time he really really means it though.

---

NASA researchers modeled what would have happened to the ozone layer without the Montreal protocol. If we had stayed on the same path we were on in the 70's disaster would have followed.

---

By the end of the model run in 2065, global ozone drops to less than 110 DU, a 67 percent drop from the 1970s. Year-round Arctic polar values hover between 50 and 100 (down from 500 in 1960). The intensity of UV radiation at Earth’s surface doubles; at certain shorter wavelengths, intensity rises by as much as 10,000 times. Skin cancer rates would soar.

---

---

Fat hurts wrote:
NASA researchers modeled what would have happened to the ozone layer without the Montreal protocol. If we had stayed on the same path we were on in the 70's disaster would have followed.

---

By the end of the model run in 2065, global ozone drops to less than 110 DU, a 67 percent drop from the 1970s. Year-round Arctic polar values hover between 50 and 100 (down from 500 in 1960). The intensity of UV radiation at Earth’s surface doubles; at certain shorter wavelengths, intensity rises by as much as 10,000 times. Skin cancer rates would soar.

---

Researchers also found that by 2040, someone outdoors in a mid-lattitude city would get sunburned in only 10 minutes.

Lack of ozone is the major reason that nothing grows on Mars. If humans ever go there, we will likely spend most of our time underground to avoid the radiation.

Life is fragile. If we screw up the planet's atmosphere we will die. We can't change the laws of physics. The climate crisis is real. It's very, very real.

The jobs and infrastructure bill is the most important legislation of our lifetime.

Reference to NASA research: https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world_avoided.html

---

---

Monkeys Skyping wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

agip wrote:

3) Calling all kinds of stuff 'infrastructure' when it very clearly is not. $400 BILLION for elderly care? That might be a good use for money but it's not infrastructure.

---

It's hard to know how much of this is intentionally included merely to serve as a bargaining chip. Final bill will likely get cut down closer to a trillion if I had to guess.

As for trying to pass it via reconciliation, I'd wager that's sort of a bluff. Might be useful if they absolutely have to do it that way, but tbd.

---

As I understand it (which I may not) in the current political there probably isn't much chance of major legislation being passed outside of the reconciliation process. Given that there are limits to how much reconciliation can be used in a session, that forces consolidated "kitchen sink" bills. That's an explanation why things that aren't infrastructure are in a nominal infrastructure bill. While one might wish for a more transparent process that considers each bit of sub-legislation on it's individual merit, that is probably not the case for most bills throughout our government's history with or without reconciliation as a factor.

---

---

Fat hurts wrote:
NASA researchers modeled what would have happened to the ozone layer without the Montreal protocol. If we had stayed on the same path we were on in the 70's disaster would have followed.

---

By the end of the model run in 2065, global ozone drops to less than 110 DU, a 67 percent drop from the 1970s. Year-round Arctic polar values hover between 50 and 100 (down from 500 in 1960). The intensity of UV radiation at Earth’s surface doubles; at certain shorter wavelengths, intensity rises by as much as 10,000 times. Skin cancer rates would soar.

---

Researchers also found that by 2040, someone outdoors in a mid-lattitude city would get sunburned in only 10 minutes.

Lack of ozone is the major reason that nothing grows on Mars. If humans ever go there, we will likely spend most of our time underground to avoid the radiation.

Life is fragile. If we screw up the planet's atmosphere we will die. We can't change the laws of physics. The climate crisis is real. It's very, very real.

The jobs and infrastructure bill is the most important legislation of our lifetime.

Reference to NASA research: https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world_avoided.html

---

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

Monkeys Skyping wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

agip wrote:

3) Calling all kinds of stuff 'infrastructure' when it very clearly is not. $400 BILLION for elderly care? That might be a good use for money but it's not infrastructure.

---

It's hard to know how much of this is intentionally included merely to serve as a bargaining chip. Final bill will likely get cut down closer to a trillion if I had to guess.

As for trying to pass it via reconciliation, I'd wager that's sort of a bluff. Might be useful if they absolutely have to do it that way, but tbd.

---

As I understand it (which I may not) in the current political there probably isn't much chance of major legislation being passed outside of the reconciliation process. Given that there are limits to how much reconciliation can be used in a session, that forces consolidated "kitchen sink" bills. That's an explanation why things that aren't infrastructure are in a nominal infrastructure bill. While one might wish for a more transparent process that considers each bit of sub-legislation on it's individual merit, that is probably not the case for most bills throughout our government's history with or without reconciliation as a factor.

---

Possibly. It could also be a single to the Republicans -Dems can pass this without them if they really have to so Rs might as well try to play ball. We'll see what happens I guess

---

Read weep trump lovers

https://twitter.com/norahodonnell/status/1379930139224645636?s=21

😂

https://twitter.com/ruprechtsfork/status/1379911038909419521?s=21

---

Trollminator wrote:
Read weep trump lovers

https://twitter.com/norahodonnell/status/1379930139224645636?s=21

---

---

agip wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

Monkeys Skyping wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

agip wrote:

3) Calling all kinds of stuff 'infrastructure' when it very clearly is not. $400 BILLION for elderly care? That might be a good use for money but it's not infrastructure.

---

It's hard to know how much of this is intentionally included merely to serve as a bargaining chip. Final bill will likely get cut down closer to a trillion if I had to guess.

As for trying to pass it via reconciliation, I'd wager that's sort of a bluff. Might be useful if they absolutely have to do it that way, but tbd.

---

As I understand it (which I may not) in the current political there probably isn't much chance of major legislation being passed outside of the reconciliation process. Given that there are limits to how much reconciliation can be used in a session, that forces consolidated "kitchen sink" bills. That's an explanation why things that aren't infrastructure are in a nominal infrastructure bill. While one might wish for a more transparent process that considers each bit of sub-legislation on it's individual merit, that is probably not the case for most bills throughout our government's history with or without reconciliation as a factor.

---

Possibly. It could also be a single to the Republicans -Dems can pass this without them if they really have to so Rs might as well try to play ball. We'll see what happens I guess

---

Biden today publically asked the dems and reps to compromise to get a bill done with 60 votes.
So Racket is probably right - that he put things in the bill as bargaining chips so the Rs can save face by getting them out.
'I got the Dems to save taxpayers $400 billion of pork spending' is something the Rs can take home to the hollers and farms of trumplandia.
On the other hand, having a 50 vote option means a bill will get done either way.
In a working senate, this would mean Ds and Rs would work together to put together a comprimise bill. In today's land of right wing talk radio working across the aisle is worse than praising putin.
Crazy times.

---

---

Fat hurts wrote:

---

agip wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

Monkeys Skyping wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

agip wrote:

3) Calling all kinds of stuff 'infrastructure' when it very clearly is not. $400 BILLION for elderly care? That might be a good use for money but it's not infrastructure.

---

It's hard to know how much of this is intentionally included merely to serve as a bargaining chip. Final bill will likely get cut down closer to a trillion if I had to guess.

As for trying to pass it via reconciliation, I'd wager that's sort of a bluff. Might be useful if they absolutely have to do it that way, but tbd.

---

As I understand it (which I may not) in the current political there probably isn't much chance of major legislation being passed outside of the reconciliation process. Given that there are limits to how much reconciliation can be used in a session, that forces consolidated "kitchen sink" bills. That's an explanation why things that aren't infrastructure are in a nominal infrastructure bill. While one might wish for a more transparent process that considers each bit of sub-legislation on it's individual merit, that is probably not the case for most bills throughout our government's history with or without reconciliation as a factor.

---

Possibly. It could also be a single to the Republicans -Dems can pass this without them if they really have to so Rs might as well try to play ball. We'll see what happens I guess

---

Biden today publically asked the dems and reps to compromise to get a bill done with 60 votes.
So Racket is probably right - that he put things in the bill as bargaining chips so the Rs can save face by getting them out.
'I got the Dems to save taxpayers $400 billion of pork spending' is something the Rs can take home to the hollers and farms of trumplandia.
On the other hand, having a 50 vote option means a bill will get done either way.
In a working senate, this would mean Ds and Rs would work together to put together a comprimise bill. In today's land of right wing talk radio working across the aisle is worse than praising putin.
Crazy times.

---

Getting it done with 60 votes is a stupid idea. There is absolutely no point in that and Biden knows it.

This whole charade about reaching out to Republicans is only designed to allow Joe Manchin to say he tried really hard to be a true centrist and work with Republicans.

You will not find 10 Republicans willing to go along with anything and it will eventually pass via reconciliation.

---

Joe Manchin to the rescue. Saving our country from Biden and the other screwballs in the Democrat party. Screw Trump. Will donate to this guy.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-manchin-filibuster-op-ed_n_606e5392c5b68ddf94b8f09d

---

Fat hurts wrote:

---

agip wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

Monkeys Skyping wrote:

---

Racket, PhD wrote:

---

agip wrote:

3) Calling all kinds of stuff 'infrastructure' when it very clearly is not. $400 BILLION for elderly care? That might be a good use for money but it's not infrastructure.

---

It's hard to know how much of this is intentionally included merely to serve as a bargaining chip. Final bill will likely get cut down closer to a trillion if I had to guess.

As for trying to pass it via reconciliation, I'd wager that's sort of a bluff. Might be useful if they absolutely have to do it that way, but tbd.

---

As I understand it (which I may not) in the current political there probably isn't much chance of major legislation being passed outside of the reconciliation process. Given that there are limits to how much reconciliation can be used in a session, that forces consolidated "kitchen sink" bills. That's an explanation why things that aren't infrastructure are in a nominal infrastructure bill. While one might wish for a more transparent process that considers each bit of sub-legislation on it's individual merit, that is probably not the case for most bills throughout our government's history with or without reconciliation as a factor.

---

Possibly. It could also be a single to the Republicans -Dems can pass this without them if they really have to so Rs might as well try to play ball. We'll see what happens I guess

---

Biden today publically asked the dems and reps to compromise to get a bill done with 60 votes.
So Racket is probably right - that he put things in the bill as bargaining chips so the Rs can save face by getting them out.
'I got the Dems to save taxpayers $400 billion of pork spending' is something the Rs can take home to the hollers and farms of trumplandia.
On the other hand, having a 50 vote option means a bill will get done either way.
In a working senate, this would mean Ds and Rs would work together to put together a comprimise bill. In today's land of right wing talk radio working across the aisle is worse than praising putin.
Crazy times.

---

Getting it done with 60 votes is a stupid idea. There is absolutely no point in that and Biden knows it.

This whole charade about reaching out to Republicans is only designed to allow Joe Manchin to say he tried really hard to be a true centrist and work with Republicans.

You will not find 10 Republicans willing to go along with anything and it will eventually pass via reconciliation.

---

Brojos- what’s up with the slow page loading on this thread??? Punishment for orange man losing? 😂

---

Trollminator wrote:
Brojos- what’s up with the slow page loading on this thread??? Punishment for orange man losing? 😂

---