this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
105 points (100.0% liked)

politics

25168 readers
2383 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
105
Congress faces shutdown dilemma that could mess with Trump's first 100 days (www.nbcnews.com)
submitted 8 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Summary

Congress faces a Dec. 20 deadline to avoid a government shutdown, likely passing a continuing resolution (CR) to fund the government until March 2025.

This would delay a full spending deal but give Republicans more influence under Trump and a GOP-controlled Senate. However, it creates an early funding deadline in Trump’s term, complicating his agenda on tax cuts and immigration.

Democrats retain power to shape legislation due to the Senate’s 60-vote threshold.

Disaster relief funding and House Speaker Mike Johnson’s re-election further complicate negotiations.

all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 91 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

Honestly, fuck it, play their game. Shut down the government until you get some solid concessions from these right-wing pricks.

It's their government now, but if we still have the purse strings, let's cut off their ability to do shit by fucking defunding them.

I don't give a damn anymore. Taking the" high road" lead us to fascism.

People forgot you cannot reason with fascists, the only language they understand is power and so you have to be ready for a fight.

Use the power you have now, Democrat Congresscritters, or lose it entirely.

I mean, all these federal employees who will be furloughed are looking at losing their jobs entirely under Trump anyway. No offense to them, but maybe it's time to take a little personal pain to save the fucking nation.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 29 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I don't see it as a dilemma, however the GOP have the levers of power in Jan. They'll likely as not restart the gov and take credit while blaming the Dems for the interruption in services.

The DNC need to start doing something very simple. They need to highlight every single fucking policy that harms the pocket books of the common voter. Then they need to divest from PACs and talk about getting rid of Citizens United. Finally they need to promote a higher minimum wage and start siding with Unions again.

However none of this will happen, because if they were willing to do that, Harris would be in the Whitehouse in Jan and they'd have the congressional super majority.

The only Dems that won their last elections did so on a platform of fuck the rich.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The DNC need to start doing something very simple. They need to highlight every single fucking policy that harms the pocket books of the common voter. Then they need to divest from PACs and talk about getting rid of Citizens United. Finally they need to promote a higher minimum wage and start siding with Unions again.

...and which billionaire owned news outlet will actually cover boring stuff like that instead of whatever new antics the idiot Trump is up to today?

It would literally require a home-grown network of journalists and news organizations that aren't owned by oligarchs to make it happen, and even then, would anyone even read or watch it?

Democrats could run on all of that, but who would even get told?

Nah, they need to figure out that crazy shit is what grabs news headlines, and they need to start laying down positive-but-crazy shit. Start at "jail all billionaires" and then make a compromise of "only taxing them at 100%." If they start with something crazy the news will cover it. The news would flip out at something like jail all billionaires, and it would catch tons of media attention, and then they can pare the issue down to something reasonable.

Shut down congress, start making crazy demands, watch the news cover it all. That's literally all Trump's strategy has ever been, so why are we ignoring what works. Media covers him because he says bombastic shit all the time that upsets people. That's literally the main reason they cover him so much.

Think about if we had a congress that was shutting down over trans youth healthcare? Forcing a shutdown so we can ensure trans youth can get the help they need. Like literally go after the hotbutton issues that Republicans lose their shit over. Make the media cover it.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Yeah, that's genius! Let's make it so the DNC is completely indistinguishable from the GOP and feed into the outrage loop that the media has been leveraging since the 80's. It's not like that's exactly what Harris tried in the campaign she just lost.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

How did Harris try that exactly? By calling them weird? Oh she didn't go as far as standing up for American citizens with crazy out-there ideas? Oh all her ideas were starting from a position of compromise with Republicans to begin with?

What the fuck are you talking about? The most "outrageous" she got was calling them weird. She wasn't demanding billionaires in shackles. Give me a break.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They're not going to demand billionaires in shackles, that's the issue.

Your idea is just as outrageous.

My point is the only proven successes for Dems in the last election is for candidates that separate themselves from monied interests and focus on what's best for the common man. It doesn't matter what national paper covers their campaign.

We need more Guzofskis, not some Trump analog in the DNC https://www.newsweek.com/democrat-triumphs-republican-stronghold-warning-sign-trump-1828406

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

And I think you're really overrating the success of folks like Guzofski, especially considering this article viewed him as a "warning" to Trump a year before Trump was re-elected and Republicans won all three houses of government.

Like, what fucking crack are you even smoking to still be playing such a losing fucking game. Get angry, get wild, make unreasonable demands, make the media cover you. That's what Trump does and it fucking works.

He's out here threatening to annex Canada, and people won't shut the fuck up about it because it's so unhinged. You can't argue, this dumb shit dominates the news cycles.

The reason people stay home is because Democrats aren't fighting tooth and nail for us, instead always starting from positions of compromise and then compromising further. Separating yourself from monied interests isn't enough, you have to put your money where your mouth is and take fucking risks for your citizens. If that means saying something risky just so the media will pay attention, so be it.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The news cycle is a distraction. My argument is all politics are local and that's where the GOP is eating the DNCs lunch. Fed judge appointments, groups like Moms for Liberty, local news channels parroting GOP talking points. National reporting is a distraction as all the papers are owned by billionaires. They'll report on whatever new shiny that passes by. Apparently it's working well because you're proposing to feed directly into it and give them more power.

https://apnews.com/article/moms-for-liberty-donors-revenue-gop-schools-70d733e024d81f7ad054b0f321e67647

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_judges_appointed_by_Donald_Trump

https://www.investopedia.com/billionaires-who-bought-publishers-5270187

https://www.yahoo.com/news/wing-propaganda-infiltrates-local-news-220756559.html

https://chomsky.info/consent01/

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Dude the time to give a shit about media consolidation was 40 fucking years ago, when Manufacturing Consent was god damned published. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is calling and wants to remind you that media consolidation was kickstarted under Bill Clinton. Oh yeah he signed off on the Copyright Term Extension Act to give Disney a break, too. The Clinton's literally pioneered the act of shooing protestors out of the picture frame so everything looked better on TV. The 1995 film Spin covers it in great detail.

That window of opportunity has long past, and the Democrats embraced media consolidation 30 years ago, get over it. We play by the rules of the system we live in, not by the rules we wish them to be. The rules of this ecosystem demand angry, bombastic, over-the-top to catch clicks.

Further, we are literally on a site no one will go to because it's too janky because it's all open source and volunteer, but the corporate funded Bluesky is massively popular, despite owing tons of money to Blockchain Capital. People talk big but are generally too pussy to go with anti-corporate options.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Electoral reality doesn't align with your loud shouting unfortunately

“So voters in some places are making real distinctions to say this is not somebody who is aligned with Trump or represents him in the same way, or this is someone who has the state’s interest in mind in a way that other candidates don’t,” he said. “And that really is a different story from one state to the next.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/11/09/ticket-splitting-2024-election/76098631007/

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 8 months ago

I think the major issue with that idea is that the pain of a government shutdown is not equally felt by Republicans and Democrats. Republicans actively want to disrupt or destroy a lot of the government functions anyways, so they don't really care when all of those things are temporarily shut down. If anything, it gives them what they want.

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

but if we still have the purse strings, let's cut off their ability to do shit by fucking defunding them.

i expect republicants to go 'nuclear' and get rid of the filibuster right away, at least for the upcoming session. they don't need two-thirds or even just 60 votes to do that.

they'll pass anything and everything they want, confirm appointments of anyone they want, without regard to opposition from anyone.. all with a simple majority.

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Yeah, that's right in the Turtles wheelhouse.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Fucking hell. He hasn't even been inaugurated yet and it's already a shit show.