Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Also, are you sure you want people to rate your comments?

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

The press swings at every pitch, we don’t have to.

I desperately hope that, yet again, i am wrong.

If you thought you’d already seen people saying the stupidest things possible on the internet, prepare yourselves.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

We are aware of all internet traditions.

Fuck these fucking interesting times.

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

He wakes up lying, and he lies all day.

Fear or fury? The choice is ours.

Republicans do not pay their debts.

Oppose, oppose, oppose. do not congratulate. this is not business as usual.

People identifying as christian while ignoring christ and his teachings is a strange thing indeed.

The real work of an opposition party is to hold the people in power accountable.

The arc of the moral universe does not bend itself. it is up to us to bend it.

Is trump is trying to break black America over his knee? signs point to ‘yes’.

The revolution will be supervised.

Jack be nimble, jack be quick, hurry up and indict this prick.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

Hi god, it’s us. Thanks a heap, you’re having a great week and it’s only Thursday!

A tremendous foreign policy asset… to all of our adversaries.

Wow, I can’t imagine what it was like to comment in morse code.

You are here: Home / Open Threads / Biden Speaking LIVE (Now-ish)

Reader Interactions

128Comments

  4. 4.

    Elizabelle

    Good speech.  Missed the beginning.  But this is directed at (young) people w student loans.  The hypocrisy of Republicans accepting PPP and tax breaks.

  5. 5.

    Dangerman

    I’m not sure fucking rogue fits quite right; they did what they were literally paid to do by their Sugar Daddy’s (or their wives’ SD’s). So, they are hookers, accountable to no one. Ok, fucking rogue fits just fine.

  6. 6.

    Elizabelle

    Jesus fuck I hate the Washington press corps. Did you hear of those media whores  with those questions? Fuck ’em.

  7. 7.

    Elizabelle

    Turned it off.  Maybe they’re extra virulent because Joe made it clear he has their number in yesterday’s interview.

  8. 8.

    Alison Rose

    [moving my comment downstairs up here, didn’t see the new thread]

    Some dumb bitch reporter yelled out at Biden after he finished his remarks “why did you give borrowers false hope”. This is why I could never be president, because I would have told her to slurp my ass.

  9. 9.

    Elizabelle

    President Biden really called out the Republicans’ hypocrisy.  Very effectively.

  14. 14.

    Steeplejack

    I watched Biden’s talk, and I just want to say that it is incomprehensible to me how anyone can claim that he is senile or demented or whatever. You may not agree with him, and, yes, he does have occasional verbal lapses (related mostly, I’m sure, to his earlier stuttering problem), but c’mon, man, he speaks clearly and cogently off the cuff—in marked contrast to the “rock concert drum solo that went on way too long” verbal stylings of TFG.

  15. 15.

    Martin

    So, I’m not a fan of loan forgiveness as a policy. I think it’s great politics, but this creates a real moral hazard with universities. I’ve been in university budgeting and financial aid pool allocation, and this does set up some adverse incentives.

    But until we can get a Congress that can actually tackle of these problems, we gotta make do with what we can. I thought he made the case well.

  17. 17.

    Elizabelle

    That is their modus operandi isn’t it? Biden gives a measured and reasonable speech, and some operative, posing as a media member gets everybody riled up with an ugly ass question.  Ruins the aftermath, and time for thinking about his points.

  19. 19.

    Ken

    I wonder if we will hear the words “fucking rogue Supreme Court”?

    Or “The bombing begins in five minutes.”  Very statesmanlike remark, I am told, by one of the finest presidents of the past fifty years, I am told.

  20. 20.

    Steeplejack

    @Elizabelle:

    Yeah, the one claiming Biden gave [somebody] “false hope”! Fuck that idiot—should be named and shamed. Where is Twitter when I need it?!

  21. 21.

    Elizabelle

    @Alison Rose:  let’s keep an eye out.  Someone will ID her.  Even if it’s harder to access Twitter. My fear is that she’s w a more “mainstream” outlet, but who knows?

  23. 23.

    cain

    @Steeplejack: Biden was incensed by that question. It was coached to trigger him and get a rise out of him. He handled that question well and pivoted it. After all, that program was set to go forward till the GOP whined to the SCOTUS.

  26. 26.

    WaterGirl

    @cain:

    I don’t think Biden pivoted from the question at all.  He answered it with this.

    “I think the court misinterpreted the constitution.”

    Great job, Joe!

  27. 27.

    Jeffro

    @Steeplejack:in marked contrast to the “rock concert drum solo that went on way too long” verbal stylings of TFG.

    “stylings” needs quote marks but other than that?  THIS is the description of trump’s babble-dee-boop that I have been waiting for – props!

  29. 29.

    Dave

    One thing I’m trying to determine is if this ruling regarding loans also invalidated the proposed changes in repayment that was part; I suspect so because of course they would have but all reporting is focused on the forgiveness aspect not the repayment portions.  I’ve not had much luck finding that information.  Hell it may not be clear to the agencies themselves yet.  So wondering if any commentators have any insight to offer.

  30. 30.

    Jeffro

    also, we are going to fucking crush these people next November.

    I’m (almost) glad that things have gone beyond just “defeat trump”.  It becomes clearer and clearer by the day  hour  millisecond who’s holding American workers, students, and families back at every turn.

  33. 33.

    Alison Rose

    @Elizabelle: I peeked at Twitter and a few people are saying it was Kristen Welker, but I’m not sure how they know that. I know of her but am not super familiar, is she usually a jackass?

  35. 35.

    Steeplejack

    @Baud:

    It particularly pisses me off because it’s one of the tropes hammered on by my RWNJ brother, who styles himself as one of the intelligent, reasonable, “fact-based” “conservatives.” Well, you know what they say: if you’re voluntarily sitting at the drooling RWNJ table—guess what, you’re a drooling RWNJ.

  37. 37.

    Ken

    @Dorothy A. Winsor: Someday you’re going to persuade me to start my own great American novel — the one with the serial killer stalking the White House Press Corps.

    The big “Act II” scene will be the press secretary announcing to the assembled WHPC, “The FBI believes that the killer targets the person who asked the most inane question at the previous day’s session. Any questions?”

  38. 38.

    Jeffro

    It sure looks to me like Dems are starting to coalesce around “expand the Court” now as a necessary remedy for this corrupt court.  GOOD.

  41. 41.

    Captain C

    @Steeplejack:

     “rock concert drum solo that went on way too long” verbal stylings of TFG.

    Which tended to consist of nothing but the same out-of-time paradiddles repeated for an hour.

  42. 42.

    Steeplejack

    @Alison Rose:

    I have to say I was wondering if it was her, because it sounded like her, but I didn’t get a visual.

    I’m sure we’re all delighted that she will be taking over for Chuck Todd in the big chair.

  44. 44.

    cain

    @WaterGirl: no I meant the first question, where he pivoted to blaming the republicans for using the court to take away debt repayment. False hope – fuckin A.

  45. 45.

    becca

    @Alison Rose: Kristen Walker is the new host of Meet The Press when Chuck Todd exits. She’s WH correspondent for NBC at present. She comes across as a shameless gotcha type. Ugh.

  46. 46.

    JWR

    @Elizabelle: If it was a woman, I’d bet the questioner was one Weijia Jang. She’s known for her nutty, not thought out questions, and who Jen Psaki once asked, “who are these ‘many people’ saying what you claim they are saying?”

    @Alison Rose: Ooo, Kristen Welker. Good guess! And yes, she usually is a jackass, and currently next in line for Chuck Todd’s jerb.

  47. 47.

    Chris

    @Martin:

    The French don’t seem to be as inclined to trust the system as Americans are.

    Over a thousand years of monarchy will leave marks.

  48. 48.

    cain

    @JWR: I saw pics of her and she seems to have a vibe that reminds me of any number of Trump’s press secretaries. I’m not hopeful.

  49. 49.

    catclub

    @catclub: ​
     It was a question about failures in Afghanistan. Possibly referring to a recent report. Biden seemed to point out that as he predicted, Al Qaida would not be in Afghanistan now.

  51. 51.

    Elizabelle

    @Steeplejack:  I think we should burn her to the ground, if it is Kristen Welker.  That was an insane question, and she clearly has poor judgment and cannot be counted on to be fair.  Yes, I realize that is a job requirement for ascending at Meet the Press and NBC corporate.

    Waiting to find out who it was, but if it was a major, that person should be gone gone.

  52. 52.

    Alison Rose

    @Elizabelle: I mean, she could’ve even just phrased in a bit more of a weasely way, like “Are you concerned that some borrowers might feel like they were given false hope” or something. It would still be shitty, but at least it wouldn’t have sounded like her making her own accusation against him.

  55. 55.

    sdhays

    How many questions did our press corpse ask about the CPAP machine? We need details!

    Brand? How loud was his snoring? Is he dying?

  56. 56.

    Elizabelle

    @Alison Rose:  That kind of behavior is why we can’t have nice things.

    Just tear the people who are trying to help down.  Stone the firemen.

  57. 57.

    JPL

    I was just listening to Andrew Weissmann and it made me think of LAO.   Wow he was a real asshole as a prosecutor, but has turned into a voice for reason.

  58. 58.

    TriassicSands

    I wonder if we will hear the words “fucking rogue Supreme Court”?

    That will happen on the same day that Donald Trump acts presidential. When asked directly Biden’s response was “This is not a normal court.” That’s true, but it doesn’t begin to describe the SCOTUS majority. First, I’m not going to criticize Biden for being Joseph Biden. Second, it won’t do any good or change anything. He doesn’t even have the support of every Democrat.

    As I listen to this, so far Biden hasn’t criticized the Court, but he’s focusing on the Republican Party in Congress, which is sensible. He has no power to change the Court, but he knows there is an election next year and that is the only current avenue or change.

    In the end, we have to depend on voters. I’d rather rely on Biden, but the GOP and the Court will never cooperate.

    And now, stupid questions from he media.

  59. 59.

    Chris

    @Martin:

    And then created a whole separate country and spent the next 200 years and change getting comfortable with the notion that It Can’t Happen Here.

  60. 60.

    Eunicecycle

    Someone on Twitter had a screenshot of the person that they claimed asked the question and it was a blonde woman.

  63. 63.

    Martin

    @sdhays: And this is why I couldn’t be a WH reporter. My question would be the same every time: ‘Mr. President, many people are saying that you died yesterday. Can you confirm that you did not die yesterday?’

  64. 64.

    TriassicSands

    @Jeffro:

    I’m afraid Biden has recently ruled that out. He doesn’t want to “politicize the Court” in a way that we might never recover from.

    Yep, politicizing the Court would be a terrible thing. That ceased to have meaning in Bush v. Gore.

    Ultimately, if that were going to happen, it would be best (now) if they did it after Biden wins re-election and the Dems control both Houses. None of those three is a given. It would be great to do it right now, if we were certain Biden would win next year and if the votes existed in the Senate. I don’t think they do. And Biden is not pushing it, which is a decision he has to make.

  65. 65.

    TriassicSands

    @Eunicecycle:

    I know you didn’t expect the GOP to do something 1) good for the American people and 2) that could help Biden win re-election.

    They suck. But you know who sucks even more? The people who vote for Republicans.

  67. 67.

    brendancalling

    @becca: i used to have to watch her when I worked for Raw Story. She’s vapid and asks stupid questions. I disliked her intensely then, and continue to dislike her intensely.

  69. 69.

    TriassicSands

    @artem1s:

    Joe made one huge mistake there — he said he thinks they “misinterpreted” the Constitution. He apparently thinks that the SCOTUS Six actually “interpret” he Constitution. They don’t need no stinking Constitution when they already know what outcome they want. Why complicate things with the Constitution. Better to have the clerks find words and phrases that taken out of context can support their desired outcome.

  71. 71.

    bjacques

    So does the LGBT+ fake cake ruling vacate all those red state anti-BDS laws? If you can refuse service to gays, certainly you can refuse to buy Israeli products, right? Somehow I reckon the answer will still be “no”…

  72. 72.

    laura

    I’m still so furious about this decision and affirmative action- and a short nap hasn’t improved my mood. CJ John Robert’s has really covered himself in glory this session. Inequality and debt peonage, returning us to the Lochner era, dismantling the Administrative State, denying the existence and purpose of the reconstruction amendments and reestablishing Jim Crow at every opportunity. And he didn’t do it for the billionaires as Uncle Ruckus and the God botherers, he did it because that’s who he is and I hope he dies in a grease fire.

  73. 73.

    David 🌈 ☘The Establishment☘🌈 Koch

    Rest in Peace Alan Arkin

    Argo
    Little Miss Sunshine
    Gross Pointe Blank
    Four Days in September
    Glenngary Glen Ross
    Escape from Sobibor
    The In-Laws
    The Defection of Simas Kurdirka
    Freebie and the Bean
    Catch-22
    The Heart is a Lonely Hunter
    Popi
    Wait Until Dark
    The Russian are Coming, The Russians are Coming

  74. 74.

    Gvg

    @TriassicSands: he can’t afford to attack the court that personally until he has really defanged them because they can always overturn more stuff or rule more unfairly. He can maybe attack them after he is out of office while trying to rally support for a successful to get reforms in place but the visible head of the party, the President really can’t quite be that attack dog.

    Someone else has to do that part for us.

  75. 75.

    Geminid

    @TriassicSands: A “huge mistake?” In this context, I don’t think so.

    It’s easy to criticize. But how would you have answered the question right there, on the spot?.

  76. 76.

    Deputinize Eurasia from the Kuriles to St Petersburg

    @Alison Rose:

    Well, she is a Hahvahd grad slated to run Meet The Press, so assholism is likely genetic.

  77. 77.

    topclimber

    @schrodingers_cat: “The same Supreme Court that overturned Roe now refuses to follow the plain language of the law on student loan cancellation. This fight is not over. The President has more tools to cancel student debt — and he must use them. More than 40 million hard-working Americans are waiting for the help that President Biden promised them, and they expect this administration to throw everything they’ve got into the fight until they make good on this commitment,” said Warren.

    She and Biden are going to kick the crap out of the GOP on this issue. As will countless work horses in our Congressional Caucuses.

  81. 81.

    Suzanne

    @topclimber: It takes a real village idiot to look at the events that happened today and attempt to (logically) blame Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, but I guess every community needs one. You are patient.

  82. 82.

    Citizen Alan

     

    @TriassicSands: 

    Joe biden will not veto a bill passed by a democratic house and senate that expands the supreme court.  If he has made the tactical decision that it is pointless to talk this up now while the votes for it simply aren’t there and doing so risks becoming a campaign issue beneficial to the gop, I am not going to second guess him.

  85. 85.

    TriassicSands

    @Gvg:

    I wasn’t calling for him to directly attack the Court, certainly not by saying more than he thinks it was wrong. I thought I made that clear in the commentS [sic] I’ve made here.

    As I said in my first comment about this, I’m not going to criticize him for being Joe Biden. I’ve followed him for almost forty years and coming out and saying the SCOTUS is a “rogue court,” for example, just isn’t Biden. And that’s OK, because he has zero power right now to do anything about the Court itself, so, today, he directed his attention, wisely and correctly, I think, to the GOP.

    At this point, there are so many places to point fingers, it’s exhausting. Various targets that people use to explain why we’re so screwed with this SCOTUS majority: Bernie Sanders, Bernie Bros, Hillary Clinton, Jill Stein and Susan Sarandon, the Electoral College, voter suppression and hyper-partisan gerrymandering, RBG not retiring, Mitch McConnell refusing to give Garland a hearing, and on an on. That is a list, not my list. I put the lion’s share of the blame on the electorate, but that is harder to change than anything else.

  86. 86.

    Carlo Graziani

    @Martin:

    So, I’m not a fan of loan forgiveness as a policy. I think it’s great politics, but this creates a real moral hazard with universities. I’ve been in university budgeting and financial aid pool allocation, and this does set up some adverse incentives.

    But the US system of higher education is full of perverse incentives! Many of which are directly responsible for creating the mass-indebtedness crisis that debt forgiveness is meant to address!

    It makes no sense to focus only on the perverse incentives affecting students. Young people are presented with an economically perverse choice as they exit high school: go to college—which for many naturally produces unsupportable levels of debt—or sacrifice a chance at a credential without which much career advancement is foreclosed. This despite the fact that the credential usually teaches nothing of actual economic value. But since vocational education is considered second-tier and esteemed poorly, millions go to college every year to derive essentially zero benefit from it, while amassing a crippling debt that takes away their freedom to explore lives of value that pay too little to redeem that debt.

    And the benefit of this perverse culture of higher education accrues directly to colleges and universities, where this captured market of tuition-payers drives inflation at a rate that has historically outstripped general inflation by at least a factor of two (average over the past 20 years), and at twice the rate of median household income growth. None of this has anything to do with the excellence of the product: it is straight-up supply and demand, where demand is driven by economic anxiety. Not to put too fine a point on it, college tuition increases come from a nearly predatory business mindset of the University adminstrations themselves.

    The most infuriating part (well, one of them, anyway) is the comfortable middle-class “protesters” of debt forgiveness, who smugly opine that they paid their college debt, so why shouldn’t the young lazy entiltled kids do the same, I ask ya. Never once acknowledging that their debts were an order of magnitude lower than what is being dropped on a typical 21-year-old grad nowadays, or that they lived in times when there was a great deal more economic security and a great deal less risk, that it was a hell of a lot easier for them to repay those debts then than they would discover is the case today, if they had to do it over. Sorry, who is the “entitled” party here?

    This is not directed at you, btw, I know and understand what you’re saying about moral hazard. But having that discussion without acknowledging the larger context fails to recognize where the truly perverse incentives really are.

  87. 87.

    RobArt

    @Elizabelle:

    Biden gives a measured and reasonable speech, and some operative, posing as a media member gets everybody riled up with an ugly ass question.  Ruins the aftermath, and time for thinking about his points.

    Watching this I wished we could force every voter (and every member of the news media) to watch and absorb Biden’s remarks. He touched on several important policy distinctions between Democrats and Republicans in such a short time. I so wish that the “news” folk saw themselves as educators. 😕

    I admit I don’t always watch primary source content—I tune in to the screaming pundit circuses more often—but whenever I do I learn more and feel better. We have a good president. I fear that few Americans have the attention spans to know that. The mediators whose mission ought to be informing the nation have chosen show business instead.

  89. 89.

    topclimber

    @Geminid: I get the outrage at the press questions but what matters more is that Smoking Joe came out swinging at GOP greed and Bounceback Biden immediately had a plan in place to soften the immediate blow. And all the press badgering (who are jackals to judge?) only showed how sharp and tough he is.

    We can kick ass on this issue and make sure a Democratic Congress makes a permanent fix.

  91. 91.

    Eolirin

    @TriassicSands: Biden hasn’t threatened to veto any such attempt, so he’s really just providing cover for a Senate that might not have the votes for it even if we had the House. Biden doesn’t have a say otherwise.

  92. 92.

    TriassicSands

    @Citizen Alan:

    And I couldn’t agree more. Which is what I’ve been saying. Writing that Biden thinks this or says that is not criticism, just statement. Pointing out that Biden just recently said he doesn’t want to expand the Court is simply acknowledging what he said. He said that he doesn’t want to “politicize the Court” in a way we can’t ever get back from. That’s understandable, but the Court has already been politicized to that degree by Republicans. Biden also said something like, “maybe that’s just the optimist in me.” Nothing we say is going to change that or make it right or wrong, wise or silly. It’s just who Biden is.

    As to whether he would sign a bill to expand the Court, that’s meaningless, because the votes aren’t there and without a significant change in the Senate, they probably won’t be. I’m sure he knows that. I have no idea what he’s doing behind the scenes, but I would be surprised if he were trying to convince Senators to expand the Court. He could be, but I doubt and that is out of my — and our — control. I guess I can say a hundred times I’m not going to criticize him or second-guess him at this point and commenters here will continue to respond like I’ve criticized him. So it goes.

  94. 94.

    Eolirin

    @TriassicSands: I think it’s really just more, what Schumer and Jeffries are saying about court expansion is what’s going to actually matter here. Biden’s kinda secondary to that. You’re right, it’s very much for the best that he not get too involved here, at least publicly.

    This is for the congressional leadership to deal with.

  96. 96.

    Aussie Sheila

    The USSC has done at least one thing. It has immeasurably aided a broader understanding of its actual political power, and sharpened the determination of the politically active to do something about its unacknowledged (till now) legislative power.

    Good.

    It is ridiculous that any Court should have the power that the USSC Court has abrogated to itself. However people decide to do it, at least reform is on the table.

  97. 97.

    Kelly

    @Carlo Graziani: I studied for my BS at the University of Oregon in the 1970’s. Graduated debt free with pretty good summer construction laborer jobs and minimum wage 10 hrs a week during school. Easy to do back then, impossible now. I want young folks to get what I did.

  98. 98.

    TriassicSands

    @Eolirin:

    OMG, apparently I’m willing to take Biden at his word and one commenter here after another is going to misinterpret what I’ve written and come up with rationales for what he’s doing that have no actual basis in fact.

    Biden has made it clear repeatedly that HE doesn’t want to expand the Court. And he’s explained why. He doesn’t have to do that to give “cover” to Senate Democrats. I understand his reasoning and I’m not going to make up interpretations that aren’t actually supported by any facts we have to try to make his words and actions reflect what I want to happen. As they say, YMMV.

    I think Biden’s reasoning is understandable. Expanding the Court is a huge, provocative move. Republicans will undoubtedly retaliate. We might end up with a SCOTUS with 435 justices. Who knows? The real key is winning elections, getting large enough majorities in both Houses to enable real change. Politically, right now, given the American electorate, that isn’t very likely.

    In 2022, with more reason to vote Democratic than at anytime in recent history, Democratic turnout went down, not up, when compared to 2018. That scares me more than MTG. Historically, left leaning voters have not been very reliable. My hope is that next year, the threat that the GOP poses will have finally really registered and the 2024 election results will be a huge surprise, with Democrats winning and flipping seats they aren’t supposed to win. I’ll do what I can to make that happen, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

  99. 99.

    topclimber

    @Carlo Graziani: Thanks to tenure, higher ed has the same two-tier pay system that plagues other professions. How many adjunct professors that are the mainstays  of colleges got there via student loans?

    We need to figure out a better kind of tenure.

  102. 102.

    Anyway

    The debt relief cancellation decision is wholly on the SC(R)OTUS Six – no plaintiff in the case had standing, and Congress authorized the debt relief. Blaming Dem senators is lame.

  103. 103.

    schrodingers_cat

    Calling me names doesn’t change the fact that had HRC won in 2016 she wouldn’t have appointed Gorsuch, Kavanaugh or Barrett.

    Going back even further if not for Naderites we wouldn’t have had Roberts and Alito.

    If the issue of student debt is so important to the self anointed progressives why haven’t they written any legislation to address the issue and relied on executive orders instead?

    But name-calling is easy. Thinking is hard.

  104. 104.

    TriassicSands

    @Eolirin:

    All I can say is that Biden himself has made it clear he doesn’t want to expand the Court. He’s president AND a politician. That could be how he really feels (I think — think, don’t know) that’s probably true. I have no idea what he’s said to Schumer and other senators. Would he sign a bill to expand the Court? Probably, but I wouldn’t be shocked if he didn’t, although I would be surprised. Has he tried to encourage or discourage senators to pass a bill. I’ve no idea, but I’d guess he hasn’t done either. If he really, really, really doesn’t want to expand the Court, then he probably doesn’t want a bill passed, but if one were, he could easily explain that because the Court is so corrupt and reckless (my words, not his), he feels compelled to go along with the will of the senators. But if he really, really, really doesn’t want the Court expanded, he could make it clear to Schumer and other key senators how he feels and they would probably — probably — go along with him. I don’t think we have to worry about any of this, because there is not indication that the votes for expansion are there.

    Now, if the SCOTUS dropped a ruling that hurt Manchin’s fossil fuel interests and limited Sinema’s fashion choices, things might change. It’s a funny world.

    And Biden may feel differently if he wins a second term and by some miracle gets a larger Senate majority. Stay tuned.

  106. 106.

    Jackie

    @Another Scott: I don’t either; blonde with deep tan/bronzed complexion…

    I don’t watch GQP news, and I’d recognize most of CNN and MSNBC reporters. Faux WH reporters are usually men. Guessing Newsmax or OAN.

  108. 108.

    TriassicSands

    @schrodingers_cat: If the issue of student debt is so important to the self anointed progressives why haven’t they written any legislation to address the issue and relied on executive orders instead?

    I don’t know who is calling you names — I haven’t been following that part of this thread, but the votes just aren’t there in he Senate for student loan debt forgiveness. Or haven’t been. So, executive orders are the only game in town.

    I often wish the Democrats would bring up one bill after another and force the GOP to vote “NO” on things that would genuinely help the people, but generally, legislation that won’t pass isn’t even written. And any legislation that doesn’t have overwhelming, as in 100% support by Senate Democrats, will just make them look bad when it fails. That isn’t how the Senate normally works.

    I will offer this, I don’t think there is any reason to refer pejoratively to “self-appointed progressives” when not all Democrats can be considered progressives and if they were some would lose their next election. That is probably true of Manchin (someone I loathe) and Tester, to name a couple.

    But if people are calling you names, I understand why you’d be upset.

  109. 109.

    schrodingers_cat

    @Anyway: They are not directly responsible, but surely we all knew that with this court this outcome was distinct possibility.

    Unlike most of us, senators can actually write legislation to address the issue.

    We are here because both Gore and HRC lost their presidential election narrowly.

  113. 113.

    suzanne

    Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have supported every Democratic priority with their vote. They’re two of our most reliable votes. They are on the right side of this issue. Warren endorsed HRC, for God’s sake.

    The GOP is not, and the problem lies there. (Sinema and Manchin have not been reliable Dems, either, but I notice that our commenter who’s on an anti-progressive hobbyhorse didn’t call them out.)

    Blaming progressive senators is the dumbest fucken take on this issue. God. There are times I wonder why we lose, and then I remember moments like this.

  115. 115.

    Darkrose

    @Martin: So, I’m not a fan of loan forgiveness as a policy. I think it’s great politics, but this creates a real moral hazard with universities.

    I’m not sure what you mean by this–could you elaborate?

  117. 117.

    geg6

    @Dave:

    I haven’t read the decision and haven’t read anything on that yet.  But I doubt that they will be simply because new and different various payment plans have been implemented through regulations many, many, many times over decades.  There are currently like 6 or 8 different payment options.  In my 25 years in financial aid, payment plans have changed and morphed many times.

  118. 118.

    Darkrose

    @TriassicSands: I think Biden’s reasoning is understandable. Expanding the Court is a huge, provocative move. Republicans will undoubtedly retaliate. We might end up with a SCOTUS with 435 justices.

    We could. Or he could recommend increasing it to 13 to match the current number of circuits. That’s giving a specific number and a non-political rationale.

  119. 119.

    TriassicSands

    @Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): Dems still did very well in 2022.

    Apparently, Republican candidates also got more total votes that Democratic candidates did. Doing “very well” simply meant we lost the House by less than expected and managed to retain the majority in the Senate. One a very good thing, the other simply avoidance of disaster, which I’ll gladly take. But with Dobbs and MAGA, Democrats should, if we had anything close to a responsible electorate, have widened their margin in the House and possibly have defeated at least Johnson in Wisconsin.

    But a closer look isn’t quite so hopeful, at least not to me.The reason we held the Senate was almost certainly because the Republicans nominated a bunch of extraordinary lunatics. We can’t count on that happening in the future, though Republicans are crazy in general. In Georgia, it was a close race between a fine Democrat and quite possibly the worst candidate the Republicans have ever nominated. If the GOP had nominated someone a bit more plausible, the Republican, tragically, probably would have won.

    I was relieved by the outcome, but I’ve voted in every election since my very first vote in the 60s. I can’t do anything about it, but I’ve never thought that “oh, it’s a midterm” was an excuse for a large drop in turnout. Yes, it is the norm, but it is a terrible norm that ignores the reality of our political system. It matters who controls the House and Senate.

    Under some circumstances, it would be far better to control both Houses (with super-majorities — last seen decade ago — than the presidency. That is variable with lots of conditions.

    So, how did Democrats do in 2022? I’ll take the results, but they don’t increase my optimism about the future.

  122. 122.

    TriassicSands

    @Darkrose:

    Which is almost certainly what he would do. But the retaliation would be for Republicans, who don’t care about how many apellate courts there are, to look at the seven to six Dem-appointed majority and increase that to at least an 8-7 Federalist Society majority, explaining, innocently, as they always do, that Socialists did it first. i doubt the Dems would respond to that, because that would be a majority that could easily be overcome through retirement or death and they, understandably, don’t want an endless expansion race that destroys the Court. Knowing that, the GOP, which never met a norm it wouldn’t ignore, might choose to expand the Court to 17, since the Dems added four, they should, too. And the race would be on. Or we’d be where we are today.

    However, that doesn’t mean Democrats couldn’t do good while they had the majority. But to reverse all or any of the horrendous decisions the Roberts Court has handed down, they would have to ignore stare decisis. Republicans would use that against Democrats, and the electorate, ill-informed and easily misled as always, would probably get the wrong message.

    So, Biden’s reluctance is understandable. To me, anyway.

    ETA: Your comment makes perfect sense, except we’re dealing with Republicans who have abandoned democracy, don’t care about norms or fair play, and have always been more successful at messaging than Democrats. That success is largely because when you rely on fear, you don’t have to rely on facts and details that really matter, but that most voters don’t care about enough.

  123. 123.

    Darkrose

    @TriassicSands: That’s fair. I think a big part of the problem, though, is that Democrats are afraid to talk about expanding the court because it immediately conjures up images of FDR’s “court packing” and overreach. Framing it as simply making an adjustment that’s been made multiple times to keep pace with the size of the country won’t change anything the GOP says, but it might help reassure liberal-but-not-leftist voters and perhaps shift the Overton Window enough to at least get Serious People to consider the idea.

    Or maybe not. I just read an op-ed in the Guardian by a guy who wrote that Biden “refused to do anything of consequence to fix the problem, such as adding justices to the court, which conservatives control 6-3.” Because of course he can just do that! People don’t actually know how the government works.

  125. 125.

    Ella in New Mexico

    @Martin:this does set up some adverse incentives.

    Honestly not being snarky here but what exactly is going to “incentivize” a return to college costs that can be afforded out of pocket for any other than commuting college students going to local, state schools and community colleges?

    No one is going to reduce their tuition, room and board to that level. Ever. It’s like the last time you could purchase a new car for $5000, or a new house for $65,000. Those days are gone and they’re never coming back.

    Scholarships can help, but again, only the best and brightest students can get those, particularly in state schools. I have a daughter who graduated with a 4.1 and a excellent SAT score, got the largest scholarhip UNM offered and still had to borrow to be able to go to Albuquerque and live in the dorms. AND she had a part time job the entire time she attended.

    I mean, the “experts” would say then don’t go to schools where you have to borrow, or even better don’t go at all just get job training for vocational careers. So then what happens to the nurses, teachers, mental health counselors and social workers, accountants and banking professionals? You have to have at least at BA/BS for entry and often are required to pursue graduate training to advance in your career.

    We need robust student loan repayment reforms and YES, loan forgiveness programs if we want anything other than a burdened middle-upper middle class who can’t pay for their childs daycare bills, a mortgage and save for retirement because of student loan debt.

  126. 126.

    Hellbastard

    I just wish Biden would have referred to “the republicans on the Supreme Court” when dishing out the criticisms. He was giving them a pass as part of the right-wing apparatus. The problem is not just “Republicans in congress.”

  127. 127.

    Aussie Sheila

    @schrodingers_cat:

    You are exactly right on this. I remember watching Nader run in 2000 and being amazed that anyone even vaguely on the left could ever risk such a vote in a FPTP voting system. As for 2016, don’t get me started. I’m not as anti Sanders as you appear to be, but heaven help me, plenty of politically aware people downunder were very aware of what would happen to the USSC if Clinton lost. The soi dissant US prog/left look like children from here.

    It wouldn’t matter so much for them, but the effects on the poor and the marginalised are simply terrible in the US.

Comments are closed.