Democratic Party Rebuild
- Thread starter the next guy
- Start date
Because there is an entire segment of the population that needs housing outside of the poorest among us.
Regardless, government projects already go through the private sector. The government isn’t paving roads, making bridges, nor building homes themselves.
The government did not only build houses for the poorest amongst us, the government used to be a competing nation builder before it handed it off to the private sector in the honor of unchecked capitalism
That's by choice and by design.
Last edited:
Dillah810
Flat Girther
Politics aside, Napoleon is truly a terrible person. Like, what a piece of shyt
This is the dude yall are on here defending…then yall wonder why democrats are struggling 
This dude needs to be impeached. Just a complete lack of basic governing and a total abdication of responsibility.
This dude needs to be impeached. Just a complete lack of basic governing and a total abdication of responsibility.
This is the dude yall are on here defending…then yall wonder why democrats are struggling
This dude needs to be impeached. Just a complete lack of basic governing and a total abdication of responsibility.
You just right wing yapping. Hes right
David Dayen pulls no punches
prospect.org
When people tell Trump he can’t do what he wants, he pulls back. He gets mad and shouts about it and thinks he should be a dictator, but the means of fighting back are available and often successful. When markets fell in April after the Liberation Day tariffs, he took those tariffs off the table, and what has replaced them are more hype than substance. When Los Angeles kept up the protests of National Guard deployments, they were quietly confined to two federal buildings and then canceled. The law firms and higher-education institutions that fought back got far better consequences than those that collaborated. Trump is even hedging on the next stop on the National Guard blitzkrieg, Chicago, after sustained pushback from local officials.
The key element that has made Trump’s second term different from the first is that the pushback at the national level from the opposition party is at best pathetic and at worst nonexistent. Governors have found their voice, but the leadership in Washington is foundering, even as they are made irrelevant.
Trump’s latest prodding at the edges of democracy is a so-called “pocket rescission.” We’ve already seen Congress give in and allow a small amount of already appropriated spending to be rescinded, under a process whereby the president lists the rescissions and Congress has 45 days to agree. The great minds of Project 2025 have devised a new policy that the administration is eagerly implementing: If the rescission message is delivered within 45 days of the end of a budget year, Trump can just not spend the money no matter what Congress says.
This is illegal. The Government Accountability Office answered the question of whether pocket rescissions are allowable with one word: “No.” Congressional Republican appropriators have called them illegal. The very idea that you can stop spending money that Congress approved because you requested to rescind it too late in the year is facially absurd.
But Trump did it anyway, cutting $5 billion in foreign aid and daring anyone to stop him. And this is really just the beginning of sweeping powers claimed by this administration to dictate federal budgets entirely within the executive branch, the Congress and the first article of the Constitution be damned.
Which brings us to the Democrats, who are watching the congressional power of the purse be vaporized, and who have a leverage point in the form of a budget deal that they must lend votes to by the end of the month. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said he would block a budget deal if Republicans signed off on the first rescission package, on the grounds that Democrats can’t make a deal that would only be reversed in a partisan process later. Republicans and Trump have already said screw you, and passed Trump’s first rescission package. Now they’re canceling spending again. What will Schumer do?
Of course, this is about more than spending fights. The Democrats’ brightest young consultant stars have spent Authoritarian August telling Democrats not to talk about the military takeover of American cities, and to pivot back to affordability. Half the House Democratic caucus released an immigration grand bargain at a time when a roaming paramilitary force is unleashing terror on American streets. There is a critical lack of understanding of this moment, and even a lack of understanding of what the people who elected these representatives sent them to Washington to do.
I’ve read a month of stories about Democratic “strategies” to manage the shutdown. They range from cutting deals to not threatening to shut things down to not deciding whether to threaten to shut things down. “We are in uncharted territory,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) told Punchbowl, a dim recognition of everything obvious in front of his face. “But I still believe it is in the best interest of our country to do as much as we can in a bipartisan way.”
I kind of give up. I took a lot of heat for writing that the coup had failed within a month of Inauguration Day. In a way, I was seeing the same pattern as Bernstein: that Trump pulls back when criticized, that the public had turned on him, and that populism without popularity is doomed. I read that again and found it just as true. What I didn’t account for was the complete uselessness of the opposition party that could turn those trends into successful pushback that retains some semblance of a democratic system—but hasn’t.
So upon their return, Democrats in Congress have a choice. They can blind themselves to everything happening in the government, on the streets they walk in the nation’s capital, in the White House parked just a mile or so away from the House and Senate chambers. Or they can open their eyes and recognize that pretending the same old politics can deliver the same old results is madness. Treating the government funding fight like a normal process would be insane. Not only has public sentiment shown the desire to fight the unpopular authoritarian, but marginally better policy has historically been the subsequent outcome of such fighting. Collaboration or silence would simply betray the country.
There’s No More Business as Usual in Washington - The American Prospect
The country is rapidly devolving into rule by an unpopular despot. The Democrats who blind themselves to this are causing great harm.
prospect.org
When people tell Trump he can’t do what he wants, he pulls back. He gets mad and shouts about it and thinks he should be a dictator, but the means of fighting back are available and often successful. When markets fell in April after the Liberation Day tariffs, he took those tariffs off the table, and what has replaced them are more hype than substance. When Los Angeles kept up the protests of National Guard deployments, they were quietly confined to two federal buildings and then canceled. The law firms and higher-education institutions that fought back got far better consequences than those that collaborated. Trump is even hedging on the next stop on the National Guard blitzkrieg, Chicago, after sustained pushback from local officials.
The key element that has made Trump’s second term different from the first is that the pushback at the national level from the opposition party is at best pathetic and at worst nonexistent. Governors have found their voice, but the leadership in Washington is foundering, even as they are made irrelevant.
Trump’s latest prodding at the edges of democracy is a so-called “pocket rescission.” We’ve already seen Congress give in and allow a small amount of already appropriated spending to be rescinded, under a process whereby the president lists the rescissions and Congress has 45 days to agree. The great minds of Project 2025 have devised a new policy that the administration is eagerly implementing: If the rescission message is delivered within 45 days of the end of a budget year, Trump can just not spend the money no matter what Congress says.
This is illegal. The Government Accountability Office answered the question of whether pocket rescissions are allowable with one word: “No.” Congressional Republican appropriators have called them illegal. The very idea that you can stop spending money that Congress approved because you requested to rescind it too late in the year is facially absurd.
But Trump did it anyway, cutting $5 billion in foreign aid and daring anyone to stop him. And this is really just the beginning of sweeping powers claimed by this administration to dictate federal budgets entirely within the executive branch, the Congress and the first article of the Constitution be damned.
Which brings us to the Democrats, who are watching the congressional power of the purse be vaporized, and who have a leverage point in the form of a budget deal that they must lend votes to by the end of the month. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said he would block a budget deal if Republicans signed off on the first rescission package, on the grounds that Democrats can’t make a deal that would only be reversed in a partisan process later. Republicans and Trump have already said screw you, and passed Trump’s first rescission package. Now they’re canceling spending again. What will Schumer do?
Of course, this is about more than spending fights. The Democrats’ brightest young consultant stars have spent Authoritarian August telling Democrats not to talk about the military takeover of American cities, and to pivot back to affordability. Half the House Democratic caucus released an immigration grand bargain at a time when a roaming paramilitary force is unleashing terror on American streets. There is a critical lack of understanding of this moment, and even a lack of understanding of what the people who elected these representatives sent them to Washington to do.
I’ve read a month of stories about Democratic “strategies” to manage the shutdown. They range from cutting deals to not threatening to shut things down to not deciding whether to threaten to shut things down. “We are in uncharted territory,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) told Punchbowl, a dim recognition of everything obvious in front of his face. “But I still believe it is in the best interest of our country to do as much as we can in a bipartisan way.”
I kind of give up. I took a lot of heat for writing that the coup had failed within a month of Inauguration Day. In a way, I was seeing the same pattern as Bernstein: that Trump pulls back when criticized, that the public had turned on him, and that populism without popularity is doomed. I read that again and found it just as true. What I didn’t account for was the complete uselessness of the opposition party that could turn those trends into successful pushback that retains some semblance of a democratic system—but hasn’t.
So upon their return, Democrats in Congress have a choice. They can blind themselves to everything happening in the government, on the streets they walk in the nation’s capital, in the White House parked just a mile or so away from the House and Senate chambers. Or they can open their eyes and recognize that pretending the same old politics can deliver the same old results is madness. Treating the government funding fight like a normal process would be insane. Not only has public sentiment shown the desire to fight the unpopular authoritarian, but marginally better policy has historically been the subsequent outcome of such fighting. Collaboration or silence would simply betray the country.
'What I didn’t account for was the complete uselessness of the opposition party that could turn those trends into successful pushback that retains some semblance of a democratic system—but hasn’t."David Dayen pulls no punches
There’s No More Business as Usual in Washington - The American Prospect
The country is rapidly devolving into rule by an unpopular despot. The Democrats who blind themselves to this are causing great harm.
When people tell Trump he can’t do what he wants, he pulls back. He gets mad and shouts about it and thinks he should be a dictator, but the means of fighting back are available and often successful. When markets fell in April after the Liberation Day tariffs, he took those tariffs off the table, and what has replaced them are more hype than substance. When Los Angeles kept up the protests of National Guard deployments, they were quietly confined to two federal buildings and then canceled. The law firms and higher-education institutions that fought back got far better consequences than those that collaborated. Trump is even hedging on the next stop on the National Guard blitzkrieg, Chicago, after sustained pushback from local officials.
The key element that has made Trump’s second term different from the first is that the pushback at the national level from the opposition party is at best pathetic and at worst nonexistent. Governors have found their voice, but the leadership in Washington is foundering, even as they are made irrelevant.
Trump’s latest prodding at the edges of democracy is a so-called “pocket rescission.” We’ve already seen Congress give in and allow a small amount of already appropriated spending to be rescinded, under a process whereby the president lists the rescissions and Congress has 45 days to agree. The great minds of Project 2025 have devised a new policy that the administration is eagerly implementing: If the rescission message is delivered within 45 days of the end of a budget year, Trump can just not spend the money no matter what Congress says.
This is illegal. The Government Accountability Office answered the question of whether pocket rescissions are allowable with one word: “No.” Congressional Republican appropriators have called them illegal. The very idea that you can stop spending money that Congress approved because you requested to rescind it too late in the year is facially absurd.
But Trump did it anyway, cutting $5 billion in foreign aid and daring anyone to stop him. And this is really just the beginning of sweeping powers claimed by this administration to dictate federal budgets entirely within the executive branch, the Congress and the first article of the Constitution be damned.
Which brings us to the Democrats, who are watching the congressional power of the purse be vaporized, and who have a leverage point in the form of a budget deal that they must lend votes to by the end of the month. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said he would block a budget deal if Republicans signed off on the first rescission package, on the grounds that Democrats can’t make a deal that would only be reversed in a partisan process later. Republicans and Trump have already said screw you, and passed Trump’s first rescission package. Now they’re canceling spending again. What will Schumer do?
Of course, this is about more than spending fights. The Democrats’ brightest young consultant stars have spent Authoritarian August telling Democrats not to talk about the military takeover of American cities, and to pivot back to affordability. Half the House Democratic caucus released an immigration grand bargain at a time when a roaming paramilitary force is unleashing terror on American streets. There is a critical lack of understanding of this moment, and even a lack of understanding of what the people who elected these representatives sent them to Washington to do.
I’ve read a month of stories about Democratic “strategies” to manage the shutdown. They range from cutting deals to not threatening to shut things down to not deciding whether to threaten to shut things down. “We are in uncharted territory,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) told Punchbowl, a dim recognition of everything obvious in front of his face. “But I still believe it is in the best interest of our country to do as much as we can in a bipartisan way.”
I kind of give up. I took a lot of heat for writing that the coup had failed within a month of Inauguration Day. In a way, I was seeing the same pattern as Bernstein: that Trump pulls back when criticized, that the public had turned on him, and that populism without popularity is doomed. I read that again and found it just as true. What I didn’t account for was the complete uselessness of the opposition party that could turn those trends into successful pushback that retains some semblance of a democratic system—but hasn’t.
So upon their return, Democrats in Congress have a choice. They can blind themselves to everything happening in the government, on the streets they walk in the nation’s capital, in the White House parked just a mile or so away from the House and Senate chambers. Or they can open their eyes and recognize that pretending the same old politics can deliver the same old results is madness. Treating the government funding fight like a normal process would be insane. Not only has public sentiment shown the desire to fight the unpopular authoritarian, but marginally better policy has historically been the subsequent outcome of such fighting. Collaboration or silence would simply betray the country.
Sorry David party basically submitted while being 4 months behind on any trump criticism. When schumers big takeaway was taco trump to criticize him working with iran and voted to fund the government that was the end of any opposition
@the cac mamba the guys who thought it was okay to Teach Kamala and Biden a lesson by giving Trump complete control over government are now complaining that the dems are unable to stop a moving train.
Pathetic
Pathetic
It’s striking how Schumer and Jeffries look so weak.
Everyone knows you’re in the minority. Expecting the courts to save you is a cop out. Even John Thune today deferred to the courts about Congress’ spending powers.
If a continuing resolution passes on Sep 30 with no pushback to Vought, Schumer better not let that shid pass. We are basically operating with a quasi government shutdown for so many agencies
It’s really disheartening that the supposed scholars amongst us have taken their mask off to reveal that their (alleged) college education means nothing.
Pulling no punches with Trex arms is nasty work.
Last edited:
This may be the weakest that the minority party has looked in my lifetime. We understand their position and where they stand in regards to votes, but even from a informational standpoint they're both outlander and pretty much irrelevant when it comes to national politics. You'd think republicans have a super majority the way schumer and jefferies operate
I know this is a problem for you since all you've been doing is swinging on Dems and propping up Trump.