Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

kickerofelves86 t1_iw0yb9x wrote

Reply to comment by LL_is_a_Cool_J in Analysts entirely misread the Fetterman-Oz debate. These graphs show how wrong they were by immigrantpatriot

No I would have voted for lamb in the general I just think that message stinks

8

LL_is_a_Cool_J t1_iw0z31c wrote

So all the things in the past that have been accomplished in a bipartisan manner you disagree with?:

You are a hard leftist I’m guessing? No room for anything except total government authority as long as it’s from the left?

−9

[deleted] t1_iw10dx0 wrote

[deleted]

9

LL_is_a_Cool_J t1_iw148st wrote

Would have voted for Lamb because he has a (D) beside his name.

You people would rather have stalemate in Congress, stalemate that would have prevented the Americans with Disabilities Act from being passed,

You people would rather have something like CHIP not passed.

The Gang of 14 made sure that SCOTUS picks had votes from each side, until Dems "Nuked" the deal in 2013. It was good while it lasted.

2010 Obama tax deal. Would have not happened unless Obama had agreed to work with Repubs. If he had not only the upper class would have continued to see tax cuts instead of the middle class that Obama wanted as well.

​

But go ahead, downvote me because you people are so fucking partisan that you would rather see nothing get done instead of something.

−5

WhyHulud t1_iw2mias wrote

>So all the things in the past that have been accomplished in a bipartisan manner you disagree with?:

What a dishonest and asinine way to frame the discussion.

2

LL_is_a_Cool_J t1_iw37etq wrote

Hardly.

If someone claims that working across the aisle is something they hate to hear a candidate talk about then they must be against any form of bipartisanship.

It's called blatant partisanship with a dash of hypocrisy sprinkled on top.

0

WhyHulud t1_iw3grx1 wrote

>If someone claims that working across the aisle is something they hate to hear a candidate talk about then they must be against any form of bipartisanship.

I agree that that's probably the case. But that's not what was said. He said he hates the message.

And honestly, fuck your argument. The GOP has bargained in bad faith for the last 30 years, making concessions when they had to and then backing out of their side of deals for later. You want it both ways, the left compromises and you thumb your nose at them. You're going to find it much harder to do that with the changes in the voting blocks.

2