this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023

46 points (91.1% liked)

politics

19072 readers

4158 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Lawmakers say government shutdown appears inevitable (thehill.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I understand what they're saying, but it's a bad way of saying it. "Inevitable" implies there is nothing anyone could do about it. This is the direct result of choices made by a fanatical group of House members who would rather posture on social issues than actually govern. And they are the result of bad choices their electorate made in voting for them.

A small portion of our population is choosing to hurt large numbers of people (including themselves) to push extreme positions on social issues that the majority does not support.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

This is the direct result of choices made by a fanatical group of House members who would rather posture on social issues than actually govern. And they are the result of bad choices their electorate made in voting for them.

Don't forget the Speaker himself, who I think knows how horrible an idea this shutdown is, and also knows that if he brought the Senate bills up for a vote, they would pass with wide bipartisan support. But even appearing to work with Democrats will get his ass fired.

[+] [email protected] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If only the left had people like that.

That was what Justice Democrats were made for, but they give away their power to easily. They have now become like any other crip.

That is how I have seen it now, over the years of following them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How so, if you don't mind me asking?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I don't think we need fanatics, but we do need a level of passion and determination that I rarely see on the left. Bernie Sanders is almost exactly what we need, except for his age. And even so he is surprisingly effective. There has to be a new generation of leaders who will fight for their beliefs.

Figuring out where to compromise is not easy. Some compromise will always be necessary to actually govern. We're seeing the proof of that in the "Feedom Caucus". At the same time, we need people who are always pushing to gain ground, even if they can't win a particular fight.

The Squad has most of the right ideas, but I think they have been too cautious. Maybe it would be different if they had more experience and seniority. So far they've been too willing to fall in line with the moderates.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Something that I only heard today and needs to be included in every talk on this subject, is that active duty military will not get paid in the event of a shutdown. Great way to show our appreciation for their sacrifice eh?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:

A government shutdown increasingly looks inevitable as GOP opponents of a stopgap in the Senate seek to drag out the process ahead of a midnight Sunday deadline.

Opponents of the Senate stopgap, which is backed by leaders in both parties, are delaying a vote to give the House a chance to pass its own continuing resolution to fund government.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) reiterated his threat Thursday that he would do everything he could to slow down passage of the funding stopgap unless Senate leaders agree to pull $6.15 billion for Ukraine out of the bill.

“Unless something dramatic happens today or tomorrow, there will likely be a couple-of-day or longer shutdown — very, very unfortunately, because it’s our responsibility to exercise and exhaust all options,” Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.) said.

A second GOP senator who requested anonymity expressed optimism that McCarthy will be able to round up enough votes for an alternative House GOP-drafted stopgap.

Asked if there’s enough time for the Senate and House to negotiate a compromise stopgap funding bill before the Saturday deadline, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said “no.”

The original article contains 821 words, the summary contains 183 words. Saved 78%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A second GOP senator who requested anonymity expressed optimism that McCarthy will be able to round up enough votes for an alternative House GOP-drafted stopgap.

Yeah, he requested anonymity because he knows that his hope is nothing but bullshit misdirection. He's well aware that a Senate bill is on the table just waiting for a House vote that will never come, and that "an alternative House GOP-drafted stopgap" would be chock-full of poison pills that the Senate would never accept, but he's hoping the existence of the latter would deflect blame from the petulant traitor caucus and unfairly back onto the Democrats that are actually trying to govern.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Good bot.