Biden's report card. See link for rationale & details

Here's where Biden's 2020 campaign promises currently stand - POLITICO
Agree

I guess he actually did accomplish all in the quote above. But the economy is obviously still shaky so using the Politico scale, I'd called this In Progress vs Kept His Promise.

Okay with this but I could also go with Broke His Promise.

Agree

Agree

Agree but it's on the precipice of Broke His Promise.

Has there been any movement to codify Roe v. Wade?

Agree

Agree.

Things change when you become POTUS. Start the discussions now and hopefully a 2nd term priority.

Agree, think IRA was pretty good but could also go with In Progress.

Agree but not for lack of trying. Early casualty of the IRA compromise.

Looks like McCarthy will get enough support for this GOP Debt bill with a floor vote today or very soon.

Now the negotiations (and/or playing chicken) starts.

I had read earlier that July'ish was the deadline. But now possibly "early June" because tax receipts were less than expected. Fun times ahead.

Chances that US could default on its debt in early June grow amid weak tax collections | CNN Politics

I never liked that the Dem house drafted bills in secret and then just had a vote.

The GOP constantly (and correctly) complained about that and promised to do better.

They, unsurprisingly, lied.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out in the Senate. With Feinstein MIA, it comes down to Manchin and Sinema again.

Well it's not going well.....

Because Senator Feinstein was absent, the Senate overturned a Biden rule that would cut pollution from heavy duty trucks and causes harm to people’s lungs. We are putting decorum over democracy and our values. It’s time for Senator Feinstein to step down gracefully. https://t.co/qmNsJO671a

— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) April 27, 2023

Nice! Not good singing but what a performance (check out the video).

I'm guessing from karaoke in his younger years.

South Korean president woos White House with ‘American Pie’ rendition - POLITICO

Karaoke is hugely popular in parts of Asia

Hope he wasn't joking, I'm sure the offer will be accepted. It would be fun to see this happen.

Don McLean offers duet with South Korean president who sang 'American Pie' to Biden | CNN
I've not heard of it as alchemy before but his description is apt.

Since WWII, only 3 sitting VPs have run for POTUS following a 2-term President: Nixon, HW Bush, and Gore.

All three of Nixon, HW Bush, and Gore benefited from their predecessors' administrations polling in the high-50s/low-60s for approval rating at around the start of the primary season, but still, one win, two losses.

So, there's not a lot of precedent for Harris for us to go on. In addition, all three of the above had run national campaigns before and had political careers far more extensive than Harris' when they came to the VPOTUS role.

It's of course different if Biden dies and Harris runs as the incumbent in 2028, but that's effectively what happened in 1976 and although there was a temporary setback for the GOP, they then held the Oval Office for 3 terms.

There's just a ton of variables in play.

All three won the nomination, though. Of course Harris might not, but the party apparatus is definitely going to be hers from the jump. And if she is already President, it is a particle guarantee she has the nomination.

Eh, I dunno. Ford barely held onto the nomination in '76. Granted, many argue that Reagan hurt Ford's chances in the general which may serve as a warning, but I don't know that it's a lock, especially if such a term didn't go smoothly.

On the SCOTUS leaker, will they name a name(s) or say "... came from office of"?

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a justice; or a staffer who did it without knowledge of the justice; or a staffer that did it with a justice's blessing but who has enough plausible deniability.

Justice Alito says he has 'pretty good idea' who was behind leak of draft abortion opinion | CNN Politics

The Biden Presidency - 2020
 

So he’s worried that someone in the general public might try to assassinate one of them based on their ideological view? Hmmmm where have I heard that before that some extremist might cause violence against someone that is made the target of words?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It obviously came on Alito or Thomas' side. They'll never announce that.

There's a SS Fairness Act that seems to have bipartisanship support. Doesn't address the broader issue and may well make it more complicated.

But it does address an issue my wife has.

She has a complicated SS situation. She's had SS taken out as a regular employee, she's had SS taken out as a teacher, she's had SS not taken out as a teacher (different county), she is eligible for 50% of my SS via spousal benefit, she's worked enough quarters to get SS on her own, and she has her own teacher TRS pension.

With current laws, there is an offset/proration where she won't get her full SS and full pension. Simple example is 1+1 = 1.5. I think the proposed legislation below will resolve that and make it 1+1 = 2.

I read somewhere its like $80B over 10 years. TBH I am unsure this is a good bill or just pork.

Collins, Brown Introduce Bipartisan Bill... | U.S. Senator Susan Collins

SCOTUS agrees to take a case on Chevron deference and Justice Jackson recuses herself. That's the end of the regulatory apparatus.

This will be one of those rulings talked about in history books, if we still have them. Actually, they'll be corporate textbooks because the government won't be able to regulate anything unless Congress explicitly says it. Because, you know, if the government created an agency to regulate, say, education, they can't make specific rules about it -only enforce the ones that Congress explicitly states. Sigh. This is somewhat under the radar but is going to be awful.



SI

Why did she recuse herself when no one else is going to ever again... One party plays by the rules, one uses the rules to take advantage of the field. SMH

Interesting Biden move and not sure I agree.

I think Willow is defensible because we need to become energy independent. From what I've read, we are a already net exporter of natural gas, don't have a domestic need.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...biden-00093092
The article refers to allies needing an alternate supply. So probably not national security but having enough to help out allies. Surprised he thought it was worth the political capital.

SHINGLES DOESN'T CARE!

She needs to take on for the team and retire.

The only problem is she thinks the team she needs to take one for is the Chicago Black Sox.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

June 1 is the magic x date.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/01/trea...-mccarthy.html
Time to get serious. It'll be interesting considering all the supposed line the sands already drawn.

I'm not a fan of a clean bill to raise the debt limit. Something needs to be added to help return the country to fiscal sanity.

On the other hand I think the Republican bill asks for too much. Also I think it was introduced far too late to have any serious negotiations.

The budget is the time for budget negotiations. Their shouldn't be any hostage taking on paying the bills that were agreed to in the budget.

I get that, but I'm just tired of congress kicking the can down the road and racking up even more debt.

We'll blow up the economy if you don't repeal all of your legislation isn't something that can be tolerated.

On top of the fact, the road to the fiscal responsibility has to include major cuts to defense spending and a large increase to taxes on the top 1 percent, or it is not even serious.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

It isn't proper reform unless it flattens the abhorrently skewed tax structure.

And one of the few justifiable expenses in the entire budget IS the defense portion (though certainly subject to being considered for efficiency).

And there is why we need to figure out the long overdue divorce. You can have your socialist paradise, I might get to have a nation worthy of continued existence, we're both a metric fuckton happier.

When you look at total tax burden, federal, state, and local, taxation is pretty close to flat.

Planning to prioritize debt payments in anticipation that Jun 1 arrives is a good idea as an emergency & temporary Plan B. I guess in this way the US will default on "some" lower priority debt and not all of it. Regardless, it'll be a total cluster.

Congressional Budget Office.

Also the fact that wealthy people are not paying income tax but capital gains if they haven't found a cozy tax haven overseas. Most billionaires barely touch double digit tax rates when we pay that alone in just FICA.

There are most definitely other ways to be serious about it.


Agreed. I'm with NobodyHere on the continually escalating debt issue, but when you vote to spend money and don't vote to increase revenue to match, this is what happens.

I’ve been convinced for a while the gop will purposely default to make Biden look bad. There is no depth to their depravity. They do not care about the American people and the suffering this will cause if they can score political points.

I am positive that is the plan on the MTG side of the party. They have absolutely no intention of coming to any compromise, and that is also why they made sure McCarthy is to weak to make a move without them. What's destroy the economy to them if they see a white nationalist nation rising out of the ashes?


I'm very far from desiring a "socialist utopia", but I do believe we as the "richest country in the world" should at least provide the basic human services that every other industrialized nation provides. As for the defense budget, that "consider for efficientcy" is exactly what I'm talking about. Way too much of that budget is going to just sheer corruption. If we had any kind of political will and a desire to improve the federal budget, someone needs to tackle a reform on the military that would cut spending while actually improving our military force. Get rid expensive weapon system that either are no longer needed or never worked in the first place. Improve life of the service men while getting rid of contractors that are paid to provide services that they don't fulfill. Having a real system of accountability for offering and serving contracts.
That is probably a bigger fantasy than an utopian socialist society.

Biden inviting Congressional leaders to the WH to discuss the debt ceiling.

So, Biden blinked. The GOP line was "you must negotiate." The Biden line was "we won't negotiate."

What's funny is that no one is really going to talk about it in those terms.

The Dems aren't going to trumpet Biden looking weak.

But the GOP won't trumpet it either. They called the WH bluff and won. But their whole deal is constantly feeling shat on. They can't ever admit winning because where do they go from there?

We all know MTG et al don't care, which really weakens McCarthy. The question is are there 5 GOP congresspeople willing to cross the aisle to literally save the global economy?

I still think (and I could be really wrong about this) that the GOP does not lift the debt limit.

But everyone agrees to "suspend" the limit until some time close to the budget deadline.

And then the budget/debt limit negotiations can be the same thing. And the Dems can say that they aren't negotiating the debt limit. And the GOP can say that they used the debt limit to get what they wanted from Biden. Both sides get to save face.

I like this compromise.

But just as likely as the extremists take us to the very brink. Or just over it for a short period of time.

It only takes one member of the nut job parry to call for a vote of no confidence in the Speaker. They can easily shut down any negotiation, and basically shut down the House.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Fair likelihood a no confidence will be initiated in the next couple years, but seriously doubt the GOP extremist faction will get the assistance of the Dems, and the necessary simple majority.

Now if McCarthy ends up really pissing off the Dems, then all bets are off.

I'm thinking odds are the suspension will happen, don't see getting a compromise with a month left. Definitely a better Plan B than prioritizing payments and defaulting on some-but-not-all.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/02/debt...rats-deal.html

Defaulting on debts makes the deficit issue even worse. Country now has to borrow at much higher rates.


Also the people who were screaming about inflation the past year are the same people screaming about the deficit. Guess what is good for you if you owe people money??????

I read that Biden has called them all there to say “stop fucking around” , that there is really no negotiating this and time to just suspend it for now. This would be with the idea to deal with this as part of the budget. So don’t see this as a win for Rs or Biden being weak. That being said we wil, just have to see where we are come June 1st.

I would be moving far away from nuclear reactors.

This is one of the weaker attempts at a gotcha that I've read in a while. Yes it's better to be able to pay back debts in cheaper dollars, but the effect on inflation on the economy is far worse than the benefit of servicing debt cheaper. I think we have enough examples of governments printing money to deal with debt and the utter disaster that causes.

Any sensible way out of excessive deficit spending is always going to be about not exceeding our means by such absurd amounts.

I'm cool when the entire east side of Houston is oil refineries, right? I'm sure those companies will self-regulate properly. It's not like people don't routinely die there already.

And the Food and Drug Administration doesn't need to check food or drugs, except ones explicitly stated in the initial bill establishing them.

And so on and so forth

SI

Hey, it's been at least a week since I've seen a report of an explosion in Texas.

Best case is they make it impossible to regulate anything going forward. Worst case is they make every current regulation subject to a judge's whim.

This is the way to gut everything the far right hates, environmental regs, Obamacare, vaccines, anti-discrimination regs, etc.

Couple efforts to restrict Congress in stock trading. They should do something. All in all, the second option of a blind trust seems more fair to me.

I think all congressmen should only be allowed to invest in a blind trust.

With that said, what exactly is the enforcement mechanism in this bill? What happens when a congressmen is caught trading stocks. Will it just be a simple fine? A censure? Expulsion? And will be apply fairly to Rs Ds and Is fairly no matter who is in power?

It would probably be as big a farce as Clarence Thomas's financial disclosure forms.

The enforcement is the key.

Rep. X gets duly elected and say "No. I won't do that."

Then what?

Put them in the Iron Maiden!

The "assassination" video released by the Russians is fucking ridiculous. Putin wasn't even in the Kremlin when the "drone attack" happened.

Crazy they think anyone will fall for that

Turns out Harlan Crowe paid the private-school tuition for Clarence Thomas's son(really a grand-nephew, but he called him a son).

edit: OMG. Harlan's statement:

Shouldn't a judge have rules to ensure they are free of "influence"? Seems like Clarence has a lineup of people that have influence over him. You'd like being a surpreme court judge that he'd be getting paid enough to send his son to school.

I can be convinced otherwise, but I'm leaning towards this is breaking the spirit of Biden's "no new taxes < $400K" rule.

It does seem that people with better credit will pay more while people with lesser credit will pay less, and the inference is people with better credit is subsidizing for people with lesser credit. I actually don't mind lesser credit paying less (with the necessary approval process rigor e.g. no Ninja loans) but let's not do it at the same time as higher credit paying more ... give it 6-12 months in between.

Housing: How a new rule is prompting criticism borrowers with good credit are being penalized

Weird doublespeak here. I may be missing a nuance though. Maybe it's not higher rates but higher closing costs? Same difference

The next place this shows up is going to be credit card transaction fees. There's a similar line of thought that poor people are subsidizing rich people's use of credit cards for transactions because most retail prices take into account the vast number of credit card transactions and the 2-3% transaction fees retailers pay. So your poor guy paying in cash is subsidizing the rich guy's use of credit cards.

There are some places (mostly services like HVAC, flooring, landscaping, etc.) where I've seen companies add that credit card fee on top of the price if you insist on paying by credit card instead of cash/check, but most retailers don't separate it out. But I think you're going to see some form of transfer of that payment obligation to people more likely to use credit cards. I'm not sure exactly what form that will take though.

A lot of restaurants already do this. Gas stations, too.


SI

It is fair. But I can see lots of pushback b/c the people who have cards, as you noted, have more resources than those that don't. Considering that, and considering the lobbying power to the big card companies, I'd be surprised if states don't start outlawing different prices for cash/card.

I’m in real estate and it’s been the soup du jour and have spent weeks talking to experts including ceos of large mortgage banks and the inferences are inaccurate as to what’s actually in it and why and who it affects

However

I won’t waste energy trying to convince those that “can be convinced”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They should outlaw banks charging the processing fees. Using cards for transactions is much cheaper for the banks than dealing with cash.

This is all (eventually) tied to credit card benefits/rewards. There is a push to limit credit card transaction fees which would effectively end credit card benefits and the primary way credit card companies and banks market cards. There will be no more 10X cards, no miles, no card issuer-branded travel portals to buy through, etc.

I will be very sad if that happens, given that I've had many a trip nearly entire paid for with points and miles and am currently planning an 8-10 day trip to the UK next year that I may not have to spend more than $1000-1500 on a hotel and business class flights.

And incidentally, everything I just posted about credit card rewards is another rich vs poor argument.

Things can change, but it certainly seems like the Dems misplayed the politics of the debt ceiling.

At this point, the GOP was supposed to be running around like headless chickens, and they would come, exhausted and defeated, to Biden to ask for his conditions.

That's not happening. The GOP is united, and Biden is the one who seems to have no wiggle room.

The Dems have gotten better at politics since 2016, but I would not go as far as to say that they are good at it.

They had the chance to eliminate the debt ceiling when they controlled Congress, and they did not--figuring that a ceiling fight would help them politically. That seemed risky and stupid at the time. And I think that reality is showing that to be the case.

"I could take the bullet out of my opponent's gun. But I won't because people will think badly about him when he shoots me" is kind of stupid, IMO.

I'm pretty sure Manchin and Sinema never would have allowed the elimination of the debt ceiling.

Good point that I had forgotten about.

I know that high ranking Dems never really entertained the idea. But if they knew that it would never get past Manchin, then they had an incentive to pretend like it helped them.

You'd make more just paying 2% less for everything in your daily life.


They're just a middleman taking a cut and offering nothing in return to society. The more middlemen we can cut out, the better it is for both consumers and small businesses.

The idea that we'd see a difference in retail costs is laughable.

And honestly, it's kind of a form of savings. If I kept 2% more, I'd probably find ways to spend it rather than specifically save to buy $6-8K worth of business class seats to Europe. And then there's the psychology of knowing I spent far less than $6-8K in real money to pay for those seats. Right now, I'm probably looking at about $3500-4000 in points value for those seats.

Why would it not? Price matters to consumers and businesses have to compete with each other for those consumers.

Even if it just went into the businesses pocket, it's at least going to a business that is providing the product or service. Much better than a leach in the middle getting a cut for nothing. I'd rather my local restaurant get the extra 2% than some shitbag banker.

They currently can't confirm a judge despite having control over the Senate and Presidency. They misplayed the debt ceiling stuff. And SCOTUS, which has just been revealed to be taking bribes is about to make a ruling that ensures they will probably not hold the Presidency again in our lifetime.

I'd say they've gotten better from 2016 but they are still comically inept.

Yeah, that does happen ... and those are places that don't get my business again (or at all, if I spot it in time)

And honestly, it's been the opposite in recent years around here. Over half the service type businesses you mentioned I've dealt with in the past 5-10 years are card / electronic only now. Just under half will take checks at all (at least not without specific approval).

WELL so much for that streak.

The Democrats

Dianne Feinstein declines to give timeline for return to Congress in defiant statementhttps://t.co/4q8nDdSBZu

— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) May 6, 2023

The article is on Hunter's problems and possible impact on Joe. Nothing too surprising but below statement caught my eye.

Hunter is making child support payments (but maybe not consistently per the current lawsuit). I've read court order DNA has proven he is the father.

It seems out of character for Joe aka Grandpa Joe. Easy enough to acknowledge grandchild by saying something like ... "love Hunter, he and Lunden have to work it out in court of law, love to see my grand daughter if Lunden allows it etc.".

Bracing for impact: Biden world preps for Hunter Biden fallout - POLITICO

You'd think a party with so many geriatric people serving in national positions, and who just went through this with RBG & Ted Kennedy, would have figured this out by now.

I'll be damned. I just saw a DeSantis PAC 2024 commercial on HGTV. I guess he's choosing the path of eternal humiliation.

I believe Durbin can have the Senate Judiciary hold hearings & investigation, regardless of what SCOTUS does internally. I don't know if they can do anything about Thomas specifically but let's get it all out there in public.

Senate Judiciary chair says 'everything is on the table' in response to Clarence Thomas revelations | CNN Politics

He's too stubborn not to run at this point. Always the smartest man in the room and no one is going to tell him otherwise.

Once he started sinking the smart play for him would have been to let Trump know he isn't running, hope one of these indictments knocks Trump out, and then jump into the race late with MAGA support.

Or just sit out and let Trump pick you as his replacement for 2028.

Unless he starts fighting back he may end up too damaged to be a serious candidate in 2028.

With the GOP controlling the House there's absolutely no chance of anything happening to Thomas. What dems need to do is get as much out to the public as possible to put pressure on Roberts to agree to some sort of code of ethics.

Their hands are tied because the GOP doesn't care if their justices are corrupt as long as they keep ruling in their favor.

EDIT: I actually doubt the GOP cares if any of the justices are corrupt as long as they hold a 6-3 advantage on the court.

I get Congress won't do much. But Senate Judiciary is under Durbin so he should be able to get hearings & investigations going. This seems like a no brainer to me and wonder why it's not been announced already.

The judiciary committee held a hearing on it last week.

He reminds me so much of Mike Pompeo. Overly smug, ultra-entiled, and has a personality that the more people get to know them, the more they dislike them.

Re the mortgage loan program comment above:

https://www.floridarealtors.org/news...m_medium=email


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ABC News new poll has Trump trouncing Biden in a head to head. The number on this poll are in nightmare land for Biden. Only 38% said he had a mental acuity sharp enough for the job. Most do not believe he should be the candidate. 58% said Trump did a better job with the economy. And even though over 50% believe Trump should face charges for Jan. 6th, 18% of those would still vote for him.
I never expected to see poll numbers this bad. It is grim. I have long feared the economy, specifically inflation, would sink Biden. Looks like that is going to happen unless something changes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...post-abc-poll/

Of course Trump can win again (if nominated). Obviously. More likely than not, another close election. But you really shouldn't be updating your beliefs much in either direction based on a poll 18 months ahead of the election.

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) May 7, 2023

I keep saying it. The GOP is going to sink the global economy to make Biden look bad.

Or you can see where it shows Trump leading the youth vote by a lot over Biden and you can laugh at the poll because there is no way that is real.



https://twitter.com/PalmerReport/sta...38259164155905

I wonder if we will see the reverse of the Trump polling effect with Biden. Historically people wouldn't admit they were voting Trump. I wonder if that will now shift to Biden.

So I have always liked and supported Biden and I too think Democrats have to get him to step down and not run again. But who do Dems want to run? I would like to see California’s Gavin Newsome or maybe Whitmer from Michigan but fear many on the Left would view them as too moderate LOL.

It is a long ways off and fair chance economy & inflation will be in good shape by next year.

Yes. The cross tabs on this poll make it seem questionable, at best. I think and believe that Biden is unpopular, but the 2022 elections and some of the more recent special elections hold more weight to me than this poll.

I agree with you. I have always liked Biden, but this version of him (even if he is still largely competent, he is clearly not at his peak) is not ideal and the thought of him serving as POTUS in his mid-80s just doesn't seem right, for a lot of reasons.

I don't know the answer, but the question is what about Kamala Harris? I don't think she is electable right now, but she would have to show otherworld humility and be the one to make the call to not be next in line. Otherwise, the message is that the first black lady and first female to be elected on a presidential ticket, at age ~60, is not an option to be the Dem's candidate and that is going to alienate a good portion of the base.

Pritzker the Great Khan is the only choice to unify the nation.

I think there is a good chance we will be in an official recession by next year, all the while we are not going to see prices drop.

Unless Harris steps down, she wont, or MAYBE a SC Seat opens up and give her that, it is ride or die with her. He can't replace her and not lose a key part of the electorate, especially if he replaces her with a white woman (Whitmer)

yeah, I don't see the economy improving by next years election and odds are it will be worse.