disguy_ovahea @ disguy_ovahea @lemmy.world

Posts

54

Comments

4,958

Joined

1 yr. ago

We’re talking about the US Congress. Congressional primaries average ~20% voter turnout.

Democrats voted and spoke out against Trump’s cabinet nominations, forced a 15-day vote against Trump’s executive order, confirmed Biden’s pending judicial appointments when Republican attendance is low, and are the ones bringing these cases to the courts. I wouldn’t call that clutching pearls.

Maybe if more than 20% of voters showed up and voted in the primaries instead of incessantly bitching about term limits, we wouldn’t have so many capitalist centrists in Congress.

I mean, Iran is clearly taking the diplomatic high road by formally addressing the UN. It may take less time than you think.

The alternative would be a much faster replacement of the non-essential workforce. I’m not defending it. I’m stating Schumer’s reasoning because I’m sick of people painting it as if we somehow had full control of a situation and gave it away. It’s just not that simple.

I’m not. I’m saying it was a lose/lose. People who make it seem like leverage don’t understand the effects of a shutdown and how the EO would allow Trump to complete that massive step in no time.

I’m not a fan of Schumer, or any centrists for that matter. Every candidate besides Schumer and Gillibrand dropped out before the primary. I’m hoping AOC runs a NY Senate bid in 2028 so we can finally get the deadwood out.

I wholeheartedly wanted to understand your opinion. I’m no fan of Schumer. Everyone withdrew but him and Gillibrand in the primary, so I didn’t have much of a choice. Regardless, he’s my Senator, and I message and call his office often. I appreciate your point about the EO. At the end of the day, it really is no different than the others being challenged in court. That’s a valid point I’ll be taking up with his office later today. Thank you for taking the time to explain your perspective. Sorry if I frustrated you.

I’m aware. I’m not saying it was the right choice. I’m saying it was a lose/lose situation. The military powers are more of a formality to keep the Republicans in Congress’s hands clean. They have majority regardless.

Those terminations are either of probationary employees (less than two years in role), or are currently being challenged by the courts. Project 2025 outlines a complete replacement of all hired federal employees with loyalists.

The CR/shutdown was a lose/lose. According to EO 14210, Trump could terminate non-essential government employees in a large-scale reduction of workforce if there is insufficient funding. It would expedite Project 2025.

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/don-t-use-shutdown-plans-to-slash-the-federal-workforce

I understand the riders aren’t temporary, but the budget itself is. That means there will be another chance at a shutdown in September. I don’t need you to explain how this works. I need you to explain why you think it’s a better choice to give Trump the ability to indiscriminately terminate non-essential government employees than to have control of the budget. It’s your opinion that I find elusive, not the facts.

This isn’t a popularity contest. Handing Trump the ability to indiscriminately terminate non-essential government employees under EO 14210 would expedite Project 2025. It was a lose/lose situation.

So you agree that it’s temporary? Isn’t that the point you challenged?

Again, it is not a lie. EO 14210 provides Trump with the ability to terminate non-essential government employees if any of three conditions are not met, and funding is one of them.

Read it for yourself: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/don-t-use-shutdown-plans-to-slash-the-federal-workforce

What loss alone? Again, be specific. The alternative was a shutdown.

Good luck getting 2/3 of the Senate to vote for her impeachment.

Then why does this only fund the government through September, rather than the full calendar?

Not at all. My point is we have a chance to replace these people every two or four years in the primaries, but only ~20% of us actually vote in them.

False. You need to learn the difference between a continuing resolution and a budget reconciliation bill.

https://www.pgpf.org/article/what-is-a-continuing-resolution/

There was no leverage to extract concessions from the minority without inducing a shutdown. I just wish they all openly discussed this and voted together. People are more upset by the appearance of dissent than the choice made given the available options.

Democrats voted and spoke out against Trump’s cabinet nominations, forced a 15-day vote against Trump’s executive order, confirmed Biden’s pending judicial appointments when Republican attendance is low, and are the ones bringing these cases to the courts. They are doing everything they can to stop this from the minority. Pay attention or hold your criticism.