West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin leaves Democratic Party, registers as independent

[LumRaiderFan]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

[Boyz N Da Hood]

I like Manchin! He don't walk that straight line and do whatever his party wants.. we need more of him

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, Boyz N Da Hood said:

I like Manchin! He don't walk that straight line and do whatever his party wants.. we need more of him

He almost singlehandedly saved the filibuster in the Senate by siding with the Republicans in what would have been a stupid move. 

[BS Wildcats]

10 hours ago, Boyz N Da Hood said:

I like Manchin! He don't walk that straight line and do whatever his party wants.. we need more of him

Agree!

[bullets13]

I like him a lot.  This is really only a move in  name early.  He’s always done what he thought was best, and I agree with a lot of what he does 

[CardinalBacker]

1 hour ago, BS Wildcats said:

Agree!

Heck, naw… y’all want to get rid of anybody that won’t do what the radical right tells them.  Just ask those 15 Reps from Texas that just got primaries by Abbott, Paxton, Patrick and the rest of those kooks. 
 

Manchin gets it, though. And you’re right- we need a lot more thinkers up there, not followers. 

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

Heck, naw… y’all want to get rid of anybody that won’t do what the radical right tells them.  Just ask those 15 Reps from Texas that just got primaries by Abbott, Paxton, Patrick and the rest of those kooks. 
 

Manchin gets it, though. And you’re right- we need a lot more thinkers up there, not followers. 

Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?

 The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws.

Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws.

I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed. 

That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa. 

Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous?

Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops!

Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum  

So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?

 What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 

[CardinalBacker]

6 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?

 The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws.

Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws.

I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed. 

That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa. 

Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous?

Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops!

Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum  

So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?

 What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 

No offense, but both sides do it.  The Rs in Texas want to do away with decades of precedent and demand that Dems are no longer given chair positions on any committees in the Tx House. It sounds reasonable enough, until you arrive at a point when the Ds enjoy a single seat majority in the house, select the most leftist speaker of all times, and the refuse to give Rs any say in the legislative process by refusing to give them any committee chairs.  
 

Experience has shown me that any time a party seeks to consolidate power in a legislative body, it backfires. 
 

What I don’t like is a world where we cheer for Manchin for doing his own thing, but also re-elect guys like Paxton and Patrick when they make threats to R Legislators if they don’t do exactly what the Radical Right demands. Our Rep here in Hardin County lost his spot for voting against private school vouchers-his wife is a teacher. He also voted his conscience on the Paxton impeachment.  It cost him his seat…. Not because of the will of the voters in his district, but because if millions of outside dollars pumped into the race from outside the district and even an endorsement of his unknown challenger by Donald Trump himself. 
 

Why do people like you applaud Manchin for being his own man and then vote against Phelan for doing the same thing?

[CardinalBacker]

6 hours ago, tvc184 said:

What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 

That’s not a choice, it’s the same thing and equally dangerous. 
 

I’ve literally heard (with my own listening ears) the R County Chairman boast in a speech that “the only time I’ve ever voted for a Democrat was when I voted for Hillary in the Democrat primary! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!”

You’ll never guess who is tweeting all over the place about how we need closed primaries this week. 

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.  Escalation of force.  These are concepts that you completely understand and teach.  Whatever we do today, we’ll pay for tomorrow. Impeach a President over something stupid? They’ll impeach yours twice.  Promise to lock up your political rival if you get elected? You can’t cry over somebody else doing it to you… even if you were just blowing a little smoke for the morons.  

The old days of “don’t throw rocks if you live in glass houses” has now become “I’m pretty sure I’ve got more rocks than they do.”

The frightening thing is that Ds only do it to Rs. Rs do it to Ds and other Rs alike without hesitation.  

[BS Wildcats]

9 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

Heck, naw… y’all want to get rid of anybody that won’t do what the radical right tells them.  Just ask those 15 Reps from Texas that just got primaries by Abbott, Paxton, Patrick and the rest of those kooks. 
 

Manchin gets it, though. And you’re right- we need a lot more thinkers up there, not followers. 

I wish I was as “smart” as you, so that I would know everyone’s views, as you think you do.

[CardinalBacker]

2 hours ago, BS Wildcats said:

I wish I was as “smart” as you, so that I would know everyone’s views, as you think you do.

It’s not “smart,” it’s reading comprehension. TVC (who I was responding to) has gone on the record on the other post about Phelan stating “hopefully” in regards to Phelan losing his speakership. 
 

For and educated person (and educator, to boot), that’s a pretty ignorant sentiment, in my opinion anyways. Gone are the days of Jack Brooks, Carl Parker, etc… when you expected your local representation to “bring home the bacon.”  I’d like to point out another politician from SETX with as much clout as Phelan HAD in the Texas lege, but I can’t, because we’ve never been fortunate enough to have one. 
 

And smart local people are saying “hopefully” he loses his job, to our local detriment, because of Trump, Paxton, Abbott, Patrick, and every other yayhoo, NOT FROM HERE, that wanted Phelan to stop thinking for himself. 
 

I’d like to hear from this educator of lawmen, hopefully unbiased and incorruptible… what do you think of the allegations of wrongdoing on the part of “Our General,” as the Rs like to say, Ken Paxton? Would you take the directive of politicos who told you to sit down and NOT investigate at risk of your job? 

[PAMFAM10]

I ain’t like manchin at first. But I believe this country can do more of democrats in red states and republicans in blue states. I believe you grow much as a politician when it’s your beliefs vs the people you’re responsible for representing beliefs. I believe it forces you to understand different point of views. 

[LumRaiderFan]

5 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

I ain’t like manchin at first. But I believe this country can do more of democrats in red states and republicans in blue states. I believe you grow much as a politician when it’s your beliefs vs the people you’re responsible for representing beliefs. I believe it forces you to understand different point of views. 

Why would red states need more democrats?  Would it be to increase crime, raise taxes, kill more babies on demand?

No thank you, there are no democrat policies I would care to embrace.

Democrats have become a group to be defeated, not compromised with.

[CardinalBacker]

38 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Why would red states need more democrats?  Would it be to increase crime, raise taxes, kill more babies on demand?

No thank you, there are no democrat policies I would care to embrace.

Democrats have become a group to be defeated, not compromised with.

And that’s the reason the Republican Party is dying. 
 

There is no room for compromise on any idea, period, in your mind. I’m right, everybody else is wrong… it’s my way or the highway.  And Rs will just keep on losing elections. 
 

There are people who think the rich should pay higher taxes and that abortion is immoral… what are they? There are lower taxes, lower spending, 2A supporting people who also believe a woman should have a right to choose. There are proud Americans who believe in a strong border, lower debt/deficit, go to church every Sunday, but also don’t see why some dude can’t marry his boyfriend. 
 

And you think all of them are pieces of crap because they aren’t in lock step with you. 
 

News flash, buddy. Everybody else isn’t the problem… you are. 

[LumRaiderFan]

2 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

And that’s the reason the Republican Party is dying. 
 

There is no room for compromise on any idea, period, in your mind. I’m right, everybody else is wrong… it’s my way or the highway.  And Rs will just keep on losing elections. 
 

There are people who think the rich should pay higher taxes and that abortion is immoral… what are they? There are lower taxes, lower spending, 2A supporting people who also believe a woman should have a right to choose. There are proud Americans who believe in a strong border, lower debt/deficit, go to church every Sunday, but also don’t see why some dude can’t marry his boyfriend. 
 

And you think all of them are pieces of crap because they aren’t in lock step with you. 
 

News flash, buddy. Everybody else isn’t the problem… you are. 

The Republican Party is dying because of folks like you who want to compromise with socialists and folks that proclaim “from the river to the sea” in reference to Israel.  I don’t want a party that folks such as yourself want to save, may as well be democrats, which you apparently are.

My standards haven’t changed, yours have.

[Separation Scientist]

Exactly Lum. Right is still right regardless which way the wind blows. 

[Separation Scientist]

3 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

And that’s the reason the Republican Party is dying. 

I would rather belong to a political party (that you say) is dying than a party that has sold its soul out to immorality, perversion and evil.

 

[baddog]

I think the republican party is alive and well……so is the communist party. There are no democrats.

[CardinalBacker]

1 hour ago, Separation Scientist said:

Exactly Lum. Right is still right regardless which way the wind blows. 

So said every good Southerner in 1862. 

[Separation Scientist]

3 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

So said every good Southerner in 1862. 

Double down all you want. You and those like you will be held accountable for supporting the corrupted filth that controls the DC swamp.  

[CardinalBacker]

1 hour ago, Separation Scientist said:

Double down all you want. You and those like you will be held accountable for supporting the corrupted filth that controls the DC swamp.  

And your answer is to support some corrupted filth from outside the DC swamp? We had other options. 

[Big girl]

9 hours ago, Separation Scientist said:

I would rather belong to a political party (that you say) is dying than a party that has sold its soul out to immorality, perversion and evil.

 

Like the GOP

[Big girl]

9 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

The Republican Party is dying because of folks like you who want to compromise with socialists and folks that proclaim “from the river to the sea” in reference to Israel.  I don’t want a party that folks such as yourself want to save, may as well be democrats, which you apparently are.

My standards haven’t changed, yours have.

Socialists?

[LumRaiderFan]

8 hours ago, Big girl said:

Socialists?

You’re going to have to do your own research, I’m not going to waste time explaining something that you would know if you read a news article every now and then.

[PAMFAM10]

On 6/1/2024 at 10:26 AM, LumRaiderFan said:

Why would red states need more democrats?  Would it be to increase crime, raise taxes, kill more babies on demand?

No thank you, there are no democrat policies I would care to embrace.

Democrats have become a group to be defeated, not compromised with.

That’s what they want you to believe. If the dems came up with a magical bill to end all abortion and all crime etc. etc . It still Wouldn’t pass because this nation program many to believe that the other side just don’t think different there evil and must be defeated. It works in 3rd world countries and it works here in the US. Trump had liberal beliefs so did Reagan. It’s million of democrats in the military defending freedom millions of democrats in hospitals saving lives etc. etc. don’t let American politics define a person.