As an aside, this paragraph from the NY Times story also proves that the claims that the bill wouldn't have passed if 3 Dems hadn't passed away is nonsense. Even if all 3 Dems had been alive to vote for it I guarantee the GOP would've found a way to squeeze that third vote out of the remaining few. - ThreadSky

charlesgaba.com • 12 days ago

As an aside, this paragraph from the NY Times story also proves that the claims that the bill wouldn't have passed if 3 Dems hadn't passed away is nonsense.

Even if all 3 Dems had been alive to vote for it I guarantee the GOP would've found a way to squeeze that third vote out of the remaining few.

Reposted from Charles Gaba ✡️

🚨🚨🚨 #AZ01 Rep. Dave Schweikert (R) SAYS HE WOULD HAVE VOTED to strip away healthcare from up to 88,000 of his own constituents IF HIS VOTE HAD BEEN NEEDED.

Schweikert won by 3.8 points last year.

Donate to flip #AZ01 today:
secure.actblue.com/donate/house...

Comments

withanh.bsky.social•12 days ago

Just because it would have passed either way doesn’t mean that there aren’t a bunch of 70 and 80 something members that need to get out of the way.

katrinarulz.bsky.social•12 days ago

Everybody knows that the "present" votes were OKed by Mike Johnson. That is LITERALLY how both Houses work. He had already whipped the votes.

tullib.bsky.social•12 days ago

There’s no reason to believe this is true. Mike Johnson is a fucking idiot who doesn’t know how to count and the only reason his caucus holds together is a unifying belief in our fascist President.

curtkessler.bsky.social•12 days ago

At least we would have made them work harder for it. And yes, they may have done it, but with three more opposing votes there was more of a chance. Making some of the hesitant GOP hold outs vote on this would be something to run against them.

wakeykyle.bsky.social•12 days ago

Alternatively - the bill they wind up with might be substantially different/less terrible if holdouts like Massey were actually needed at the ballot. Johnson being forced to compromise with them, or with more conservative Dems like MGP, might have lessened the harm this budget produces.

charlesgaba.com•12 days ago

Agreed.

dailytrix.bsky.social•12 days ago

Just a lot of bad faith bullshit going around today.

dino-monster.bsky.social•12 days ago

Maybe, but I’d prefer to have made them work for it.

charlesgaba.com•12 days ago

Several of those responding/quoting this think I’m defending elderly Dems clinging to office forever.

I’m not & that’s not my point.

My point is that in this *particular* case, the GOP had the votes regardless. That doesn’t mean I’m happy it was easy for several of them to avoid voting for it.

daviddarmofal.bsky.social•12 days ago

At this point it's clear that no data, no carefully reasoned arguments, are going to get through to these people who seem to be personally invested in intentionally misreading your arguments.

mike-in-the-box.bsky.social•12 days ago

I've been reminded of this quote over and over again today. The ideal subjects of totalitarian rule aren't all right-wingers.

mellongraig.bsky.social•11 days ago

This could have been prevented if we had these what ifs... like AK-AL, CO-08, IA-01, PA-07, PA-08, and PA-10 that should have been won except we lost them by 2 points or less. Even other seats that were close should have been won.

It would have been a different reconciliation bill out there...

pmr001.bsky.social•11 days ago

Exactly.

youlikeraisins.bsky.social•12 days ago

It’s clear Dems are held to complete different standards than republicans. Republicans in congress are helping trump starve children and do not care trump is mentally incompetent. Even though Dems do not have the votes to stop Rs from passing anything, Dems still get the blame.

samd.bsky.social•12 days ago

it really sucks that we weren’t able to force Schweikert to take an unpopular vote though

onkelbob.bsky.social•12 days ago

This is true. And that the OP missed that salient fact - that making the republicans own every bad thing is necessary and is why we are in this mess. The Democrats in the Senate screwed the pooch when they let the CR pass.

charlesgaba.com•12 days ago

Oh absolutely! Obviously it utterly sucks that the Dems are down 3 members when every member really does count...and the larger issue of geriatric/ill-health Dems refusing to consider retiring more seriously is a real issue.

I'm just saying that it didn't make a definitive difference in this vote.

edino.bsky.social•12 days ago

It’s actually totally fine to say that older dems, especially ones with health issues, should indeed pass the torch rather then running for reelection while also thinking that lying about the impact of this for online clout is pathetic. I’ve just done it and I didn’t catch on fire or anything.

phranklindb.bsky.social•12 days ago

BLAME UPGRADE:

"ITS ALL THE DEAD DEMS FAULT !!"

iplayguitarbad.bsky.social•12 days ago

The fact that Schweikert didn't have to cast an unpopular vote is more reason why Dems are furious 3 Dems died while in office. Yeah, Repubs would continue to torture every rule to get their desired outcome, but it'd be nice if Dem lawmakers weren't making it as easy as possible for them to do so.

charlesgaba.com•12 days ago

Again, I absolutely agree that Dems have to deal with many of their older members refusal to hang up their spurs earlier/pass the torch/etc. And obviously it would be far better to have 215 instead of 212.

I'm just saying that *in this particular case* it wouldn't have changed the actual results.

iplayguitarbad.bsky.social•12 days ago

I just don't think it's sufficient to say "well, this Repub said he'd have voted against it" when that person won their last election by 3.8% or whatever.

Yeah, they said that. We know we're living on the margins here and shouldn't just assume anything of the sort.

charlesgaba.com•12 days ago

Oh absolutely! Except that in this case he openly admitted he would have voted FOR it!

charlesgaba.com•12 days ago

I was actually surprised that he admitted that--I figured he'd either say nothing at all or lie about opposing it.

iplayguitarbad.bsky.social•12 days ago

I understand your point. I'm just saying that while he did say that, we should expect the Dem party, as our only viable opposition party, should be led by people who will *force* those votes. Repubs say lots of things. They should be held to the fire to the absolute maximum possible.

iplayguitarbad.bsky.social•12 days ago

Criticism of Dems too often boils down to an individual act (like this vote). But a more rational criticism is that the Dem party is incapable of mounting any sort of sustained resistance, largely because of their gerontocracy problem.

"R's would have passed this anyway!" isn't really helpful.

joeyvazquez.bsky.social•12 days ago

Propping up gerontocracy must be extremely lucrative because otherwise... why say this?

Maybe that squeeze would've been what lost that 3rd GOP Rep their next election, but we'll never know.

All we know for sure is that the Dems were missing 3 votes because of gerontocracy enablers.

maximumeffort433.bsky.social•12 days ago

People don't care about the facts, they want a reason to keep attacking Democrats even while they're not in power, they're looking for excuses.

I don't know how we achieve change with a fact-free, vibe-based, cynicism-enraptured electorate.

gbnmd.bsky.social•12 days ago

Agreed. Give somebody a social media account and they are an instant expert on anything.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply