Biden/Harris Presidency Discussion Thread

Brian? · 23-06-2021 6:49am

Headshot wrote: »

Tonight proves the democrats need to get rid of the filibuster

The GOP blocking the voting rights bill, what an awful party

They know they have to block it other wise they are dead in the water and it's their old fault.

Ludicrous vicious circle. If voter turnout increases, the Dems always benefit. But they can’t take action on voter suppression because the GOP use their Senate power, elected by a suppressed vote, to block it.

pixelburp · 23-06-2021 8:28am

The idea that, basically, you can stall your way into killing any bill you don't like is a perversion of democracy, and the filibuster needs to die. Now: obviously what goes around comes around & its absence might be keenly felt the first time a hardline GOP bill breezes through the chambers, but the principle of the concept is obscene.

Not that there aren't ways for the Dáil to stymy bills and legislation but I'm eternally grateful a founding principle of our government is the notion that it's a constant Work In Progress - not holy writ and part of some chucklesome "Game" to be played.

TomOnBoard · 23-06-2021 3:01pm

And the thing is, if the Dems don't counter the GOP State by State perversions of democracy now, the 2022 elections will put the GOP back into the House almost for sure, due to gerrymandering. The basic voter suppression laws being passed all over the place will focus on limiting effectiveness of more liberal voting and may also hand the Senate back to the GOP.

That country will be in the throes of renewed White Supremacy for a generation if that happens.

eire4 · 23-06-2021 6:59pm

pixelburp wrote: »

The idea that, basically, you can stall your way into killing any bill you don't like is a perversion of democracy, and the filibuster needs to die. Now: obviously what goes around comes around & its absence might be keenly felt the first time a hardline GOP bill breezes through the chambers, but the principle of the concept is obscene.

Not that there aren't ways for the Dáil to stymy bills and legislation but I'm eternally grateful a founding principle of our government is the notion that it's a constant Work In Progress - not holy writ and part of some chucklesome "Game" to be played.

In fairness the filibuster is only a senate rule it is not part of the institution so to speak and can be changed or got rid of. For instance if the Democrats wanted to they could keep the rule as is except make an exception for voting rights legislation. This is exactly what the Republicans did when they decided that stacking the federal courts with far right activist judges was a priority they got rid of the filibuster but just for the appointment of federal judges. The exact same could be done for voting rights legislation.

TomOnBoard · 23-06-2021 8:01pm

There are many different voices calling for a sea-change in Democratic thinking on this whole filibuster issue, and particularly for the Manchin/Sinema tactic of keeping it intact so that, when the Dems lose the Senate again, they'll have it to fall back on, and its presence 'promotes bi-partisanship' (hint: it doesnt)

I think this American comedian/ordinary person from Georgia speaks more sense about it than a gaggle of Senators... Warning: He's not easy on the language...

https://youtu.be/265YZcKhMYY

looksee · 23-06-2021 10:30pm

Biden just made a speech about new gun control legislation. Everything he said made sense and sounds eminently reasonable to anyone in any other country, but sadly he sounded so tired, his speech was so flat and frequently slurred, that it was a gift to republican critics.

AbusesToilets · 24-06-2021 3:52pm

looksee wrote: »

Biden just made a speech about new gun control legislation. Everything he said made sense and sounds eminently reasonable to anyone in any other country, but sadly he sounded so tired, his speech was so flat and frequently slurred, that it was a gift to republican critics.

Absolutely nothing about that was sensible or reasonable, and from a purely political viewpoint, will only serve to antagonize a large portion of the populace against him at a time that he's trying push his agenda thru.

Tell me how · 24-06-2021 4:14pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Absolutely nothing about that was sensible or reasonable, and from a purely political viewpoint, will only serve to antagonize a large portion of the populace against him at a time that he's trying push his agenda thru.

Let me guess, he should roll over and ask those who supported the insurrection what exactly they are comfortable with?

Compare his tone, language and logic with the example of his predecessor who held press conferences to say short blunt statements like 'We're getting rid of Obamacare, it's a terrible terrible thing.' or any other number of examples where he gave no context and just said something was 'bad' when he didn't even understand what he was talking about.

I really wish Biden would realise what Conservatives (and some within his own party) are doing when talking about partisan agreements and a need for consensus when they aren't willing to do the tiniest thing towards making this happen.

Case in point, the American Rescue Bill and all the Republicans who voted against it and then went back to their districts lauding what it was delivering for their constituents. I'd love to see Biden ride a Democratic Agenda through all flag wearing chest thumping 'patriots' on the other side and then let their next President roll them back if they want to really own their regressive tendencies.

Carfacemandog · 24-06-2021 4:14pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Absolutely nothing about that was sensible or reasonable, and from a purely political viewpoint, will only serve to antagonize a large portion of the populace against him at a time that he's trying push his agenda thru.

Gun dealers breaking already existing laws being cracked down on is unreasonable and senseless?

Interesting...

Carfacemandog · 24-06-2021 4:18pm

TomOnBoard wrote: »

There are many different voices calling for a sea-change in Democratic thinking on this whole filibuster issue, and particularly for the Manchin/Sinema tactic of keeping it intact so that, when the Dems lose the Senate again, they'll have it to fall back on, and its presence 'promotes bi-partisanship' (hint: it doesnt)

I think this American comedian/ordinary person from Georgia speaks more sense about it than a gaggle of Senators... Warning: He's not easy on the language...

https://youtu.be/265YZcKhMYY

It's moronic in the extreme. Democrats needed to railroad everything they could through and thumbtheir noses at any and every republican taking issue with it - its not like they're without endless examples to push back in their faces from the last 4 years.

Instead, they put back in place precedents that the republicans already broke (filibuster) which does exactly nothing but handcuff themselves to a fuel the Republicans will remove as soon as they take power.

The republicans are going to win huge in 2022 and likely 2024, and more than anything it will be because the democrats let them by trying to keep pretending that there was a chance for good faith work to be done.

AbusesToilets · 24-06-2021 4:30pm

Biden has again collated gun violence with particular types of guns. His solutions aim to either outright ban or increase the difficulty to purchase most rifle type firearms. None of that will make any impact on the level of gun violence in the country.

It's also wildly disingenuous to make reference to said violence without acknowledging the main driver of those numbers.

Typical empty, perfomative nonsense.

Tell me how · 24-06-2021 6:58pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Biden has again collated gun violence with particular types of guns. His solutions aim to either outright ban or increase the difficulty to purchase most rifle type firearms. None of that will make any impact on the level of gun violence in the country.

It's also wildly disingenuous to make reference to said violence without acknowledging the main driver of those numbers.

Typical empty, perfomative nonsense.

Just how much do you want to acknowledge those numbers?

Up to and including pointing to black communities and talking about culture maybe?
But definitely not exploring the historical reasons that led the situation existing as it is today? Definitely not that I warrant. That would be a 'woke agenda' and nothing more I'm guessing.

AbusesToilets · 24-06-2021 7:10pm

Tell me how wrote: »

Just how much do you want to acknowledge those numbers?

Up to and including pointing to black communities and talking about culture maybe?
But definitely not exploring the historical reasons that led the situation existing as it is today? Definitely not that I warrant. That would be a 'woke agenda' and nothing more I'm guessing.

I've no problem talking about assessing issues faced by poor communities. A cursory view of my post history would show my support for measures that would work towards addressing those. I'm sorry the idea that one can be pro-gun and also liberally minded doesn't fit the narrative you want to push.

Tell me how · 24-06-2021 8:53pm

https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1408103224817639432

Fair play Joe.

StringerBell · 25-06-2021 7:37pm

It's an odd infrastructure deal, one bi partisan and one intended to go with 50+1 and there will be no track 1 without track 2 and vice versa? Trimmed well down too, but if it comes off then fair enough.

Will see how it all shakes out.

Have reached the point where enough time has been wasted playing to the gallery looking for bi partisanship, for the sake of it at that.

Tell me how · 25-06-2021 8:01pm

StringerBell wrote: »

It's an odd infrastructure deal, one bi partisan and one intended to go with 50+1 and there will be no track 1 without track 2 and vice versa? Trimmed well down too, but if it comes off then fair enough.

Will see how it all shakes out.

Have reached the point where enough time has been wasted playing to the gallery looking for bi partisanship, for the sake of it at that.

Some of the Republicans involved are already distancing themselves from it. Republicans gonna Republican.

StringerBell · 26-06-2021 12:30am

For 10+ years at this point there's been no change to GOP tactic when out of power - obstruct, delay, block and run out the clock as much as possible.

I genuinely have no idea how the penny hasn't dropped at this stage.

Democrats when they won the election had 24 months maximum to push through policy, Mitch took a month off at the start by delaying the handover and they will still presumably be taking their August off to catch up on their "reading" (Mitch put a stop to that last year of course but can't see the Dems doing it)

They are in danger of wasting a lot of time they may end up regretting right now. I really hope for their own sake they start to push ahead now and build some momentum. Sinema is a problem but I think she will come along eventually as she won't want to be the lone opposition within party and genuinely am a fan of Manchin, he has surely been indulged enough though at this point with his desperation for bipartisanship for the sake of it?

Manchin 10 years ago wanted to reform the filibuster. I think he can be brought around to agreeing with the Joe Manchin of 10 years ago when push comes to shove.

AbusesToilets · 26-06-2021 1:42am

StringerBell wrote: »

For 10+ years at this point there's been no change to GOP tactic when out of power - obstruct, delay, block and run out the clock as much as possible.

I genuinely have no idea how the penny hasn't dropped at this stage.

Democrats when they won the election had 24 months maximum to push through policy, Mitch took a month off at the start by delaying the handover and they will still presumably be taking their August off to catch up on their "reading" (Mitch put a stop to that last year of course but can't see the Dems doing it)

They are in danger of wasting a lot of time they may end up regretting right now. I really hope for their own sake they start to push ahead now and build some momentum. Sinema is a problem but I think she will come along eventually as she won't want to be the lone opposition within party and genuinely am a fan of Manchin, he has surely been indulged enough though at this point with his desperation for bipartisanship for the sake of it?

Manchin 10 years ago wanted to reform the filibuster. I think he can be brought around to agreeing with the Joe Manchin of 10 years ago when push comes to shove.

That the Dems haven't siezed the opportunity to secure their long term electoral success is utterly pathetic. They have likely squandered a clear mandate to enact their legislative agenda, for the second time this century. How have they learnt nothing from the debacle of Obama's presidency.

That Schumer is unable to put the screws to Machin and Sinema is damning indictment of his leadership. The Sock Puppet continues to run circles around the Dems.

Tell me how · 01-07-2021 6:49pm

This is a video well worth watching imo although it won't shock too many.
It details, from the horses mouth, just how influential big business is in accessing government law makers and how susceptible they are to this.
The links to close confidants of Biden cannot be ignored if again, they would have been expected anyway.

https://twitter.com/UE/status/1410300881761882112

At a time when records are being broken in North America for highest daily temperatures since recordings began and people are dying daily the climate crisis can no longer be seen as impending but one that is currently active.

A by topic of this video and the way lobbyists target those who are approaching re-election was a topic discussed on a recent NPR show I listened to in which a guy who has written a book on 'less democracy' was advocating that fewer elections (i.e. longer terms) would free up lawmakers more to act in a morally responsible way than from a fear of what bad press will do to their election chances. An interesting concept given that, in the US, Representatives are nearly always effectively in election cycle given the shortness of their terms.

I hope to see the topic of the above video raised in Press Conferences with Jen Psaki so that the administration is under no illusion but that what they say, and how they behave most correlate.

AbusesToilets · 02-07-2021 12:46am

Longer terms would work if there were term limits. A better option (and totally nonviable) would be to get rid of the Senate and make the House actually representative of population.

Quin_Dub · 02-07-2021 8:53am

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Longer terms would work if there were term limits. A better option (and totally nonviable) would be to get rid of the Senate and make the House actually representative of population.

I wouldn't "get rid" of the Senate but I'd certainly look to make it more representative based on Population.

The house is reasonably representative , but it gets twisted by gerrymandered districts.

So - Maybe double the size of the Senate and give extra seats to States based on Population - With all States having a minimum of 2 seats and create an independent "Election Commission" that defines both the districts and the voting rules consistently across the country.

But like you say , will never ever happen.

AbusesToilets · 02-07-2021 11:21pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I wouldn't "get rid" of the Senate but I'd certainly look to make it more representative based on Population.

The house is reasonably representative , but it gets twisted by gerrymandered districts.

So - Maybe double the size of the Senate and give extra seats to States based on Population - With all States having a minimum of 2 seats and create an independent "Election Commission" that defines both the districts and the voting rules consistently across the country.

But like you say , will never ever happen.

The issue with the House is that its numbers are capped, which penalizes States that see their population grow. There ought to be more members of the House, based on the apportioning ratio.

We've seen how the mechanisms of government fail if politicians refuse to honor them. The Senate doesn't work in the current political climate.

Manic Moran · 03-07-2021 1:05am

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The issue with the House is that its numbers are capped, which penalizes States that see their population grow. There ought to be more members of the House, based on the apportioning ratio. .

If they grow enough, they will see their representation change. My State gets two more representatives next Congress.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/which-states-won-and-lost-seats-in-the-2020-census/

That Schumer is unable to put the screws to Machin and Sinema is damning indictment of his leadership. The Sock Puppet continues to run circles around the Dems.

What screws? It is Manchin and Sinema who have the screws to put to Schumer right now. They don’t work for him. If the Democrats get more Senators, the balance off power may change, but it is not in Schumer’s favor right now.

AbusesToilets · 03-07-2021 5:32pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

If they grow enough, they will see their representation change. My State gets two more representatives next Congress.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/which-states-won-and-lost-seats-in-the-2020-census/

What screws? It is Manchin and Sinema who have the screws to put to Schumer right now. They don’t work for him. If the Democrats get more Senators, the balance off power may change, but it is not in Schumer’s favor right now.

They shuffle district numbers, but the overall number of Representatives isn't capped. Which mean that the ratio of citizens to Representative continues to expand over time. Leading to increased democratic deficits

Manic Moran · 03-07-2021 6:01pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

They shuffle district numbers, but the overall number of Representatives isn't capped. Which mean that the ratio of citizens to Representative continues to expand over time. Leading to increased democratic deficits

As long as the ratios of citizens to representatives are generally maintained equally across the states, it seems good enough. It's not as if they're going to go build expansions to the Congress building to fit new seats just to ensure that there's always a "700k constituents to 1 representative" ratio as the population of the country grows. Any representative system is inherently going to be 'less than democratic' by its nature.

The number of representatives each State has in the House is roughly proportional to their populations as compared to other states. I'd argue it's acceptable for the role.

eire4 · 04-07-2021 4:21pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I wouldn't "get rid" of the Senate but I'd certainly look to make it more representative based on Population.

The house is reasonably representative , but it gets twisted by gerrymandered districts.

So - Maybe double the size of the Senate and give extra seats to States based on Population - With all States having a minimum of 2 seats and create an independent "Election Commission" that defines both the districts and the voting rules consistently across the country.

But like you say , will never ever happen.

Some good ideas that would actually allow the Us to really become a democracy. I would throw in getting rid of the electoral college in terms of electing the president as well.
Sadly as you say though none of the above has any chance of happening and the US will continue to be what it is a corrupted pseudo democracy but dangerously one that is flirting with becoming an out and out authoritarian state.

AbusesToilets · 04-07-2021 7:12pm

eire4 wrote: »

Some good ideas that would actually allow the Us to really become a democracy. I would throw in getting rid of the electoral college in terms of electing the president as well.
Sadly as you say though none of the above has any chance of happening and the US will continue to be what it is a corrupted pseudo democracy but dangerously one that is flirting with becoming an out and out authoritarian state.

If they awarded the Electoral College votes proportionately, it would go a fair way to improving things. Simple enough adjustment, without the need for a complete overall.

Manic Moran · 04-07-2021 11:40pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

If they awarded the Electoral College votes proportionately, it would go a fair way to improving things. Simple enough adjustment, without the need for a complete overall.

I could get behind this, but there's no chance of it happening either. Democrats will not give up 40% of California's votes, neither would Republicans give up 40% of Texas', for example.

eire4 · 05-07-2021 1:28am

AbusesToilets wrote: »

If they awarded the Electoral College votes proportionately, it would go a fair way to improving things. Simple enough adjustment, without the need for a complete overall.

It just needs to go period IMHO. No place for it in a true democracy. The winner of the election should be the person who wins the most votes in the election. No need for any middleman.

AbusesToilets · 05-07-2021 1:54am

Manic Moran wrote: »

I could get behind this, but there's no chance of it happening either. Democrats will not give up 40% of California's votes, neither would Republicans give up 40% of Texas', for example.

Got to love how much the political parties fear the voters.

Tell me how · 05-07-2021 3:19am

Manic Moran wrote: »

I could get behind this, but there's no chance of it happening either. Democrats will not give up 40% of California's votes, neither would Republicans give up 40% of Texas', for example.

Aside from that, the idea of some of the lower populated countries getting metaphorically ra*ed when the larger states realise they no longer need to entertain them doesn't sound too appealing.

Obviously the arguments for true proportional representation are valid but the resources of these states could be deemed too good to leave to themselves to decide what to do with them unless state legislation is strong enough to protect each individual state. People in these states aren't going to grow any founder of Washington if they are being railroaded in to fracking or other natural habitat destroying practices just to keep Texas or California with energy or clean water or whatever.

Brussels Sprout · 18-07-2021 1:50pm

big fan of Biden bluntly calling out Facebook by saying that "They're killing people" by facilitating so much disinformation

Brian? · 19-07-2021 5:47am

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117627366#Comment_117627366

Last week Foxnews were lamabasting Facebook for attacking free speech, basically for banning Trump. This week they’re defending Facebook as a bastion of free speech, because Biden attacked them. It’s hilarious.

Vaccination rates are lowest in Red states, the GOP are afraid to do anything about it.

TomOnBoard · 19-07-2021 8:52am

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117630607#Comment_117630607

I don't believe its that the GOP is afraid to do anything about it... Its that they see nothing in it for them to support the Vaccine rollout. When Biden aims for high vax uptake, as a target, the GOP will not do anything to help him to achieve it, because that would be 'getting into bed with the Libs'. As things get worse, and more people get infected by Delta, it will force new lock-downs which will hammer Biden's economy just as Trump's economy was hammered in 2020. This will be just in time for the GOP to portray Biden/Dem Government as a failure leading up to tbe 2022 mid-terms. They want the Congressional majorities back and will go 'scorched earth' to achieve it. Like, what's another 100,000 avoidable deaths (already had over half a million under GOP rule) if it 'sticks it to the Libs'.

When you hear the poison coming out of Carlson, Ingraham, Pirro et al against the Biden attempts at getting people to take the vaccine, the vitriol can only be explained by analyses such as the above. And of course, no-one can sue those ppl because their drivel is now considered to be opinion rather than news reporting. It.Is.Crazy! And Evil!

Brussels Sprout · 19-07-2021 12:25pm

Exactly. Barack Obama talked in his latest book about how the Democrats controlled The House for the entire duration of Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr.'s presidencies but all of them were able to govern as everyone was willing to negotiate and compromise in order to get bills passed. There was no opposition for the sake of opposition.

Then the Republicans took The House in 1995 and Newt Gingrich became Speaker. This is when things started to break down. Basically they had calculated/realised that there was no political upside to helping the President get his agenda passed. This process only accelerated when Obama was elected. The Democrats took their back by ensuring that Trump could get nothing passed in his final 2 years in office but now the Republicans are taking it to new levels of cynicism by turning life saving vaccinations into a political football.

Melanchthon · 19-07-2021 1:20pm

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117631694#Comment_117631694

I have heard the theory that the breakdown is due to the Reagan era, basically Reagan passed that big immigration amnesty and regularised huge numbers of people but the reciprocal thing was meant to be that it was strictly a once off and illegal immigration was meant to be non partisanly tightly controlled and not rewarded.

TomOnBoard · 20-07-2021 5:01pm

It looks like anyone (like me) who thought that Biden would shake up the DOJ and clean out the extraordinary tenure of Jeff Sessions & Bill Barr, are in for a very rude awakening... Merrit Garland's appointment as AG has done little to restore faith so far. Here's a few concerns from the recent past:

1. Wilbur Ross was found to have lied to Congress at least twice, but DOJ not going to prosecute. However, Omarosa Manigault Newman (a Trump POS 'advisor') who 'happens to be black ' is being fined $50,000 for a late filing of a form...

2. Capitol rioter received 1st Federal sentence of 8 months. However, young black lads routinely 'earn' decade-long stints in jail for marijuana offenses...Not a single Capitol attacker has been charged with Sedition, which is incredible...

3. DOJ is trying to have grand jury evidence sealed for 50 years... This will keep EVERYTHING resulting from the Mueller investigation that then went to Grand Juries well-hidden for decades...

etc.

Sadly, so much stink remains the same!

hotmail.com · 27-07-2021 10:56am

And if people thought there was going to be a change when it comes to an bumbling idiot in office, they must also be disappointed.

Stupid politicians seems to be an endemic problem in America.

Brussels Sprout · 27-07-2021 11:45am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117667344#Comment_117667344

Don't mistake users being unhappy with elements of the new administration with a concession that it's as bad as the last one. They are incomparable.

pixelburp · 27-07-2021 11:55am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117667344#Comment_117667344

That's only an accurate statement if you deal in political absolutes; that any balls dropped by one administration is comparable to the historically lopsided number of ones dropped by the previous admin. There's simply no fair degree of equivalence to be drawn between the Biden and Trump administrations, except if one is angling towards a "they're all the same" reduction. Which TBH, by your own history here, tends to be how you swing.

There's no question a great many things wrong with the structures of American politics, from the polling stations to the Resolute desk, but you'd want to be spectacularly naive to think Biden was going to be the one to fix them. Or any. So really the question isn't - has it got better? - inasmuch as it can be phrased - has it got worse?

TefalBrain · 27-07-2021 11:57am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117638362#Comment_117638362

Come on, nobody in their right mind thought Biden would enact real change.

duploelabs · 27-07-2021 12:08pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117667705#Comment_117667705

Considering the record amount of people voting for him, I would think that's not exactly the most scientific of judgements

Brian? · 27-07-2021 1:19pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117667705#Comment_117667705

Depends how you define real.

I never expected him to turn on Israel or socialise medicine. Because he never said he would.

I fully expected him to competently enact his policies. He is and that’s a real change from the last chump.

AbusesToilets · 27-07-2021 4:40pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117668170#Comment_117668170

Not without the Senate Democrats pulling the thumb out

hotmail.com · 27-07-2021 6:12pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117667690#Comment_117667690

It was just a comment about how idiotic and bumbling Biden is.

America claims to be leaders of the free world and they keep producing stupid politicians.

hotmail.com · 27-07-2021 6:16pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117667705#Comment_117667705

Anyone from an outside view of America can see the parties there have largely similar economic and foreign policy aims and policies.

Biden compared the covid pandemic with the American War of Independence on their July 4th celebration. A bizarre, jingoistic, "patriotic" rubbish you hear from America.

Brian? · 27-07-2021 7:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117669792#Comment_117669792

What has Biden done that was stupid? I mean actions not stumbling over words.

mcmoustache · 27-07-2021 8:19pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117669813#Comment_117669813

Will you swap that €500 note of yours for my €5? I don't see why you should care about the minor difference. They're both just notes that you end up giving away for other stuff anyway.

Melanchthon · 27-07-2021 10:05pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117670186#Comment_117670186

He could stop putting forward bills that get blocked by judges because they are racially discriminating.

These being so far.

The Small Business Administration relief program.

Emergency Relief for Farmers of Color Act which was rolled into the bigger bill.

This allows conservatives to portray the Biden administration as "reverse racists" and so far at least the courts are agreeing

Also well it's hard for him to do this while keeping the left wing of his party at least slightly happy but he could choose staff picks that don't invite easy criticism, catherine lhamon being the current example.

Also he could give a top down direction to not include controversial groups/theories that put off moderates

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/26/democrats-school-critical-race-theory-500729

https://www.foxnews.com/us/it-was-an-error-to-promote-radical-crt-group-biden-admin-says-following-fox-news-report

and before there is the constant whining about the source it's got the response from the department in it. Note the way relevant to the first point I made about making picks that make attack easy, Deputy Education Secretary hosted the group previously

Brian? · 28-07-2021 8:58am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117670851#Comment_117670851

If that’s a response to my post, you consider them stupid? Correct?

whether I agree with them or not, they are not stupid.

Biden/Harris Presidency Discussion Thread

Comments