• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Democrats lost November Election (and down ticket) by giving GOP talking point that the Democrats blocked government checks to workers during Crisis

Dev1lXYZ

Member
Sep 1, 2017
931
725
380
The Democrats are playing a very dangerous little game with a well armed and rather unhinged populace.
 

Sign

Member
Jun 4, 2012
567
988
600
The Democrat's bill basically does what the Senate bill did, but adds 10 tons of bullshit. It won't pass and they will try and blame Republicans which is ridiculous because the Senate passed the House bill when they got it.
 
Last edited:

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
36,127
4,329
1,505



They're both playing with fire
Show me specific passages in the Republican bill that come anywhere close as crazy as the ones in the Democratic bill that are circulating. "Billions of dollars to help states conduct elections by mail," nice to mention that, but not the rest of the text that basically says it's illegal to require identification to vote and any individual person can deliver an unlimited amount of ballots on behalf of others... That's straight up pure unverified voting that they are asking for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oner and OSC

Sign

Member
Jun 4, 2012
567
988
600
"Democrats said Republicans were trying to add provisions that would exclude non-profit groups from receiving aid . . . "

is an interesting way of spelling "Democrats want to pay for abortions using the tax-payer's money via Planned Parenthood."

Democrats are in the wrong on this. This vote was not about okaying the bill it was about bringing it to debate. The bill had passed through 5 bipartisan committees and not just a day before the vote Schumer was up there saying things were going okay.

This is Pelosi trying to play politics because Trump's approvals and the general public's feeling toward how he has been handing this has gone up. She knows a bill that sends money directly to Americans will help Trump further. It is clear she is trying to make the bill as toxic as possible so even if Trump gets a bump from it at least they get to stuff ballots in November. Frankly, it is disgusting. Republicans passed the House bill because they were willing to put the country first, and Democrats have failed to do the same.

Unfit to govern.
 

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,694
5,390
680
Moore Park Beach
But, Nobody_Important Nobody_Important said Pelosi only wanted to change some of the wording related to stock buyback?

I eagerly await to see how this will be twisted as Trump bad and Pelosi good. Will it be the old tried Russia angle or will we go "but he is racist" this time?
While Pelosi is playing her political games, actual real people suffer.

It is an already established narrative that "Peliso just wanted to make the wording about stock buy-back stronger".
And then we see her putting huge parts of voting reform into it as well, and allocation of relief based on racial makeup.
How can you defend this when actual people are struggling.
TDS at its finest.
 
Last edited:

rykomatsu

Gold Member
Jan 2, 2008
4,715
557
1,300
Can anyone tell me why stock buyback is a bad thing?

Literally everyone with some kind of retirement account or diversified mutual fund (or direct stock) benefits from a stock buyback due to increased share price?
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Shaqazooloo

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,694
5,390
680
Moore Park Beach
Can anyone tell me why stock buyback is a bad thing?

Literally everyone with some kind of retirement account or diversified mutual fund (or direct stock) benefits from a stock buyback due to increased share price?
It is not a bad thing. It is often a better way to create shareholder value than dividends.
But you should not take taxmoney from the public and use it to create shareholder value.
That is not the idea behind any stimulus package, which is to try to "make sure the company does not go bancrupt".

It would be very bad optics to use tax money in a financial meltdown in that way.
 

Derekloffin

Member
Jun 17, 2013
569
210
465
This is... like wow, I can't believe the Dem's are pulling this stunt. I really try hard to see both sides as trying to act in good faith... there is no good faith on the Dem's part. Tons of this crap has no place in an emergency bill. Hell, tons of it shouldn't be even in normal legislation as it is heavy handed government interference BS. This is straight up ridiculous. There was some wiggle room with the Rep's approach, definitely, but this counter proposal is bad comedy.
 

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,694
5,390
680
Moore Park Beach
This is... like wow, I can't believe the Dem's are pulling this stunt. I really try hard to see both sides as trying to act in good faith... there is no good faith on the Dem's part. Tons of this crap has no place in an emergency bill. Hell, tons of it shouldn't be even in normal legislation as it is heavy handed government interference BS. This is straight up ridiculous. There was some wiggle room with the Rep's approach, definitely, but this counter proposal is bad comedy.
It is just Pelosi playing political games.

While normal people and business are hurting. Just wait for how the usual suspects will try to defend this, because TDS.
I think this just solidified Trumps victory come november.
Even normal people are starting to notice, pay attention and getting angry.
 

DeafTourette

Member
Apr 23, 2018
2,880
2,510
585

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
7,009
9,292
1,590
I am a little unsure what this all means as I was at the hospital all night and I'm heading to my regular job now. But it kind of debunks the abortion thing?



That is not over this bill, but the first relief package passed.

All this stuff being talked about is in the "plain" text of a 1100 page bill. The ballot harvesting, pork for universities and Democrat pet public works, bailing out newspapers for issues unrelated to the pandemic, planning to send out the stimulus in the form of a currently nonexistent US treasury cryptocurrency. . .

And they make most of the middle class pay back the funds.
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
21,560
45,375
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
I am a little unsure what this all means as I was at the hospital all night and I'm heading to my regular job now. But it kind of debunks the abortion thing?



Another carefully-worded fact check that seems to actually affirm that Dems included it at one point:

The language of the bill was amended to make sure abortion services did not receive funding.

Why amend a bill for something that was never included or talked about in the first place? Pelosi wanted 1 billion in relation to the Violence Against Women Act and "reimbursement for laboratory claims". The concern was that this could be used for abortion procedures and/or related lab work to facilitate abortions.

We also have Pelosi's most recent 1000+ page attempt chock full of pork, and the Democrat rejection of the existing bill in a push to get more concessions.

Do Republicans have to bend over backwards each and every time to disprove flippant claims while Democrats continue to throw out shit and get the media on their side anyway? It makes democracy a bit challenging when the public is not allowed to see both sides of the argument clearly. Almost as if it was intentional.... :pie_thinking:
 

Sign

Member
Jun 4, 2012
567
988
600
Can anyone tell me why stock buyback is a bad thing?

Literally everyone with some kind of retirement account or diversified mutual fund (or direct stock) benefits from a stock buyback due to increased share price?
It's not so much that it is a bad thing in general, but that the money being given in this situation is really meant to insure that certain businesses:

1) Can continue to pay employees.
2) Still exist after this is all over.

With that being said, the more general criticism being leveled at companies like Boeing right now is that they put themselves in a significantly weaker position by using excess funds to purchase stocks rather than shoring up / preparing for a downturn. Basically, poor management.

I am a little unsure what this all means as I was at the hospital all night and I'm heading to my regular job now. But it kind of debunks the abortion thing?



The article you posted is from 6 days ago and seems to be talking about the first House bill which has already been signed. The criticism of Pelosi in that instance was that the bill included federal funding dealing with healthcare and did not declare adherence to the Hyde Amendment which would break precedent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeafTourette

All Hail C-Webb

Hailing from the Chill-Web
Jun 6, 2004
2,031
415
1,620
New York
This is... like wow, I can't believe the Dem's are pulling this stunt. I really try hard to see both sides as trying to act in good faith... there is no good faith on the Dem's part. Tons of this crap has no place in an emergency bill. Hell, tons of it shouldn't be even in normal legislation as it is heavy handed government interference BS. This is straight up ridiculous. There was some wiggle room with the Rep's approach, definitely, but this counter proposal is bad comedy.
They've obviously put way too much into the bill. My guess is they intend to use it as a negotiating tactic, and are willing to drop the majority of it, but they really didn't need to go that far.
 

KINGMOKU

Member
May 16, 2005
7,077
4,040
1,505
The Democrats have without a doubt shown the American people, in their time of need that they do not care for them. This is going to destroy them in November. I still cannot believe they did this now. There is no way to come back from this.

Does the leadership not understand how poorly this makes them look? You pass the emergency funds, then you introduce further legislation. Stalling emergency funds is a disastrous approach as there is one thing that cuts thru all political stripes and that is money. You will always remember the person/people who screwed you out of money.

The insane lack of foresight here is unbelievable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oner

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
36,127
4,329
1,505
They've obviously put way too much into the bill. My guess is they intend to use it as a negotiating tactic, and are willing to drop the majority of it, but they really didn't need to go that far.
Yeah, that's called playing politics and this is not the time. As has been mentioned time and time again, the Senate's bill was written with Democratic support. It didn't blow up until a day or so before the vote to advance the bill. Word is that Pelosi came in and "whipped" the Democratic senators into submission.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DeepEnigma

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
12,495
21,829
905
They've obviously put way too much into the bill. My guess is they intend to use it as a negotiating tactic, and are willing to drop the majority of it, but they really didn't need to go that far.
The bill was already mostly negotiated by both sides, according to everyone, until Pelosi showed up. And how is anyone supposed to negotiate 1400 pages quickly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepEnigma

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
21,560
45,375
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
Yeah, that's called playing politics and this is not the time. As has been mentioned time and time again, the Senate's bill was written with Democratic support. It didn't blow up until a day or so before the vote for cloture. Word is that Pelosi came in and "whipped" the Democratic senators into submission.
It's also worth noting that Republicans cancelled their week-long break to work on the bill while Democrats went on vacation, returned at the very end, and slammed the door shut on Republicans' fingers.

Kinda difficult for Democrats to claim they are putting in the effort when they went on recess instead of helping their Republican counterparts. Haven't seen a single major news source bring this fact up in the discussions over the coronavirus bill, even though plenty of outlets slammed McConnell for suggesting a week-long break (which he cancelled and Republicans worked through)



 

TwoDurans

Formerly 'One (1) Giant Size Novelty Sexual Device'
Apr 23, 2011
4,347
459
940
Nah, it's as easy as saying "the GOP wanted to give the money meant for you to billionaires and corporations".
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
36,127
4,329
1,505
Nah, it's as easy as saying "the GOP wanted to give the money meant for you to billionaires and corporations".
So, basically a bunch of bullshit lies... I'm sure the mainstream media will eat it up, but I only hope the truth of the matter gets out to most people.
 

Vicetrailia

Member
Mar 12, 2019
1,347
754
420
So, basically a bunch of bullshit lies... I'm sure the mainstream media will eat it up, but I only hope the truth of the matter gets out to most people.
Some of the Democrats bill is really good and better than what the GOP offered, it's just bloated with pointless shit.

Hopefully they get something done negotiated by Sunday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zefah

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
36,127
4,329
1,505
Some of the Democrats bill is really good and better than what the GOP offered, it's just bloated with pointless shit.

Hopefully they get something done negotiated by Sunday.
Yeah, the pointless shit is the problem, especially the anti-democratic voting stuff.
 

All Hail C-Webb

Hailing from the Chill-Web
Jun 6, 2004
2,031
415
1,620
New York
Yeah, that's called playing politics and this is not the time. As has been mentioned time and time again, the Senate's bill was written with Democratic support. It didn't blow up until a day or so before the vote for cloture. Word is that Pelosi came in and "whipped" the Democratic senators into submission.
Republicans are playing Politics too. They need to remove the ability for buy backs, it's not enough for Trump to say he doesn't like them. They need to create more transparency with where the money is going, and they need to give more to the people.
You can't say that we'll get to it later, because that's bullshit. Trump is going to try and force people back to work next week. They're not going to provide anymore protections to regular people.


The bill was already mostly negotiated by both sides, according to everyone, until Pelosi showed up. And how is anyone supposed to negotiate 1400 pages quickly?
We can go back to that plan when Republicans agree to the necessary changes.
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
36,127
4,329
1,505
Republicans are playing Politics too. They need to remove the ability for buy backs, it's not enough for Trump to say he doesn't like them. They need to create more transparency with where the money is going, and they need to give more to the people.
You can't say that we'll get to it later, because that's bullshit. Trump is going to try and force people back to work next week. They're not going to provide anymore protections to regular people.

We can go back to that plan when Republicans agree to the necessary changes.
Yeah, the bill could use improvements (by the way, language preventing companies from using loan money for buybacks was alreay in there), and you usually do that by debating the bill. They voted to not even advance it for debate.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Oner

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,833
942
430
Republicans are playing Politics too. They need to remove the ability for buy backs, it's not enough for Trump to say he doesn't like them. They need to create more transparency with where the money is going, and they need to give more to the people.
I think the bill had prohibited buybacks, but I could be mistaken.
 

monegames

Member
Sep 26, 2014
2,821
2,835
615
The funny /sad part is the Dems went on and on about the "slush fund at the treasury secretary's discretion". Yet they still have it in their bill. Its just 150 Billion instead of 500
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepEnigma