It’s remarkably cheap for a billionaire to do this shit. Bezos bought wapo for $250M

It’d frankly be dead cheap for a billionaire to setup and run a progressive newspaper and/or fund a hundred YouTube progressives and progressive politicians.

Heck, they could setup and operate a general union fund and support union campaigns and union relief funds. They could indefinitely support striking workforce. Doing that just once would completely change how companies interact with unions.

They don’t have the votes to pass a law, they do have the votes to stop laws from being passed. Further, the Republicans just killed a rule that allows 30 senators to block all bills by challenging executive decisions. The Republicans killed the rule to roll back a Biden admin decision to allow California stricter emission standards. Every challenge requires a mandatory 10h of debate. There are about 100 years worth of Trump admin decisions Dems can challenge to block the upcoming budget bill.

Will they do that? Probably not, because they rolled over on the CR when they could have easily filibustered it.

And yes, Schumer knows about this, he wrote an open letter warning Republicans not kill the rule.

This is what I hate about the Democrats. They’ll happily roll over, yet I guarantee you the Republicans will abuse the hell out of this rule if a Dem president gets into office.

Exactly.

The senate is particularly bad. Schumer is basically MIA and is effectively rolling over because thinks letting republicans get everything they want somehow looks good for him.

It’ll all be super PAC donations. Because that’s untracked and allows for unlimited donations.

Often, some of the dumbest people in the company. Unless the CEO literally founded the company, chances are really high that they are a know nothing nepotism hire. Their only skill was being born to a rich and well connected family.

I really wish people would stop idolizing business leaders as ideal government leaders.

The principles that make a good business are fundamentally different and often in conflict with good government leadership.

A business would say “oh that rural farming community? let’s ignore them. They’ll never make up more than a tiny fraction of our profits”.

A good government, on the other hand says “oh that rural farming community is the breadbasket for the population. Let’s keep them happy so the people in the cities can continue to eat cheap produce”.

And this doesn’t even touch the corruption aspect. A business leader won’t likely have the morals to properly regulate their own business.

I’m rooting for that, but after the end of the trump admin. I really hate that Trump is likely getting 2 more SC justices.

Basically.

And, to be clear, 2019 was under the trump admin. I can’t stress enough how crystal clear and dire someone’s case would have had to have been for Trump’s immigration judges to grant asylum. They were giving that out to basically nobody during his first term. Except for I guess this guy.

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.

AN EXECUTIVE ORDER IS NOT LEGALLY BINDING.

TRUMP SIGNING ONE DOESN’T MAGICALLY GRANT HIM LEGAL POWER TO INDISCRIMINATELY TERMINATE EMPLOYEES.

Your opinion that an EO is somehow more scary than a bill that grants the powers of the EO to the president is what’s entirely insane.

You aren’t concerned with facts as you’ve been corrected not just by me but multiple other people throughout this comment chain. You just want to believe schumer didn’t do something stupid.

FFS I’ve already covered this while talking about the bill. It had riders ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rider_(legislation) ) that gave the admin addition discretion over the budget. Those riders are not temporary.

And I already covered EOs if you bothered to read.

You are now purposely being obtuse because you don’t want to accept that schumer did something moronic.

He helped the republicans pass a bill that Trump wanted them to pass. End of story.

Quiet simple, because there’s a bunch of nutjob republicans that want to cut everything possible yet are willing to settle for temporary stopgap measures. They nearly killed the CR and would have had trump not explicitly pressured them to pass the bill.

Passing a full funding bill would have been harder to get the nutjobs to sign on. Passing a dirty CR with explicit cuts and power grants to the president, however, was enough to win them over.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5178543-house-conservatives-working-toward-cr-after-meeting-with-trump/

Again, the schumer “A shutdown will give trump more power” messaging is a lie. Trump had an active role in getting this bill passed.

False, you need to learn what bills are and how they get their titles.

Again, just calling something a CR doesn’t make it one. Budget reconciliation bills are different as they get special privileges in the senate (no filibuster). Anything else can be called whatever you like. There’s no special law or rule that governs what can and can’t be called a CR. That’s why this is being referred to by democrats as “a dirty CR”.

https://www.coons.senate.gov/news/press-releases/ranking-member-coons-announces-opposition-to-house-republicans-dirty-cr

You don’t understand what a CR is if you think it’s permanent. A continuing resolution is stopgap funding when a budget reconciliation fails to be passed.

A CR is just a title applied to a bill. This wasn’t a CR, it was named a CR. Just calling something a “CR” means nothing. If this were actually a CR the dems in the house and most of the senate dems would not have opposed it.

As for Trump’s executive orders, those are just decrees that can be legally challenged. Much like Trump decreeing “The 14th amendment no longer counts” just saying it doesn’t make it so.

Again, Even if we take the veto out of the equation, have you thought about why the Federal Workers union was opposed to this “CR”? Why would the union for the workers that would have been most impacted by a shutdown oppose a simple stopgap CR?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/federal-employees-union-tells-congress-132950031.html

Again, if it were so true and advanced Trump’s goals, why didn’t he veto the CR? Why did he push republicans to vote for it? Why was the Federal Workers Union opposed to it passing?

You edited up above that “it’s temporary”. No, it isn’t. It wasn’t a clean CR and it vested a lot more power into the administration to make budget decisions. A shutdown would have been temporary, but it also would have caused a massive shock to the stock market (which is almost certainly the real reason Schumer and crew voted for it).

Why are you calling the propaganda office to get answers? Do you think Schumer’s staffers are going to tell you anything other than “This was the absolute most perfect and most bestest thing Schumer could have done!”. It’s literally their jobs to justify Schumers actions.

This bill supercharged and codified the DOGE actions. Now, instead of having any sort of leverage to stop the Trump admin and Elon from their actions. Instead of strong arming the republicans to actually compromise on SOMETHING in the budget bill. Schumer and crew have given them everything they asked for and they walked away with smiles on their faces. Literally. Republican senators were shocked and delighted it went through.

All but 1 house democrat voted against this. All but 10 senate democrats voted against this. The vast majority of democrats in congress understood that this was a really dumb bill to let through. Stop listening to Schumer propaganda and just think about this. Schumer, as the senate majority leader, went against the will of his party.

This is stupid lie that Schumer was peddling.

Trump could have vetoed the budget and forced a shutdown. If he got more power that way don’t you think he would have?

Stop acting like the ten Democrats that didn’t get the memo were somehow justified in messing up the nation.

Some stuff has to be consumed, like food. And that’s a major problem with plastic. Plastic is being used to protect and preserve foods, but it’s also being used as a cheap binding for shipments.

The right solution introduces an added logistic hurdle to send back packaging for reuse and to reprocess/clean that packaging.

There is actually a way out of this, but marketers hate it. It’s standardized reusable containers and outlawing or severely limiting the use of plastic and inks for product distribution.

Sure, it’d turn our grocery stores into a warehouse-like feel, but it would also make it easy and possible for reuse and recycle centers to process and redistribute packaging with very minimal waste.

It’d also make it a lot harder for companies to play the shrinkflation game.

Standardization like this does wonders.

Honestly, I’ll take that any day of the week. It’s far better than someone like Newsom who is actively courting right wing figureheads so he can agree with them about how bad progressives are.

The party would be so much better if we could get rid of the members that hate progressives.

Oh you’ve seen nothing yet. They are also going to ANGRILY FURROW THEIR BROWS. Really I don’t know how the republicans can withstand such stiff opposition.

Does money want this?

Like really truly, I’m seeing fucking bloomberg and forbes come out against trump.