• @TropicalDingdong
    link
    51 year ago

    True, but the Biden administration is definitely using the debate to put forward their own talking points (“watch it jack, we’re bringing roe back,” a new plan to cap student loan debt, new climate investments) so it’s not like we’re getting no taste of what the administration’s priorities will be in the next 4 years

    Good, and they should be. I’d like to see some Democratic with the candidates who obviously won’t be getting the nod, simply because its an opportunity to hold people accountable. How about the failure by the Biden administration on student loans? How about we have some debate questions about the supreme court and how its basically been captured by the conservative movement, and apparently, open to bribery? We have so few opportunities to actually engage in politics. We can’t give up the debates simply because of decorum or that the contenders won’t win. Its literally the only time we ever get the chance to drive the party in the direction of the will of the people.

    • HobbitFoot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      What is Biden supposed to do about the Supreme Court except nominate new justices? The problem is that you need Congress to do something.

      • @TropicalDingdong
        link
        01 year ago

        Lets here what he proposes as a solution. Its his answer to have not mine, and as President, he sure as fucking shit better have a plan, or he’s not qualified for the job. The argument here is in support of debates. Without debates, we don’t get answers to these kinds of questions.

        I sure as shit want to know what Biden’s plan is to deal with a congress that wont play ball. He needs to have one.

        • HobbitFoot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          Lets here what he proposes as a solution. Its his answer to have not mine

          It isn’t his job, unless you make the Supreme Court a Presidential appointment alone and that they can fire justices on their own whim.

          The power to deal with a corrupt Supreme Court has been clearly vested in Congress, not the President.

          • @TropicalDingdong
            link
            01 year ago

            It isn’t his job, unless you make the Supreme Court a Presidential appointment alone and that they can fire justices on their own whim.

            It sure as fuck is the Presidents job to navigate the halls of power and deliver on things they campaign on.

            • HobbitFoot
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              To a point, but the President has not been given the power to be a dictator.

              If the President’s agenda doesn’t get past Congress, what is the President supposed to do? Do you expect the President to start arresting members of Congress until the Presidents’ bills get passed?

              • @TropicalDingdong
                link
                11 year ago

                To a point, but the President has not been given the power to be a dictator.

                No one is asking them to be, but if you don’t understand that the ability to get an agenda past Congress is there job, I don’t know what to tell you. The job of a President isn’t to accept defeat for their constituents, is to find a way through.

                • HobbitFoot
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  That isn’t the President’s job to wrangle Congress. Perception over time has made people think that, but the Presidency was never set to lead the legislative branch. If that were the case, the President would be more like a Prime Minister in other countries.