Biden Cabinet Confirmation Live Thread ***hearings, votes, etc.***
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:33:03 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Biden Cabinet Confirmation Live Thread ***hearings, votes, etc.***
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 ... 82
Author Topic: Biden Cabinet Confirmation Live Thread ***hearings, votes, etc.***  (Read 101630 times)
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,232
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #575 on: February 22, 2021, 10:40:13 PM »

I’m no fan of Neera Tanden, but Joe Manchin voting to confirm Sessions and Kavanaugh but not Tanden or (possibly) Haaland has a very uncomfortable and blatant through line.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #576 on: February 22, 2021, 10:43:24 PM »

Why is Manchin saying he has "remaining questions" making people think he'll oppose Haaland? To me the clear implication is that he's teeing her up to answer those questions at her hearing tomorrow.
Logged
beesley
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,140
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #577 on: February 23, 2021, 10:04:30 AM »

Why is Manchin saying he has "remaining questions" making people think he'll oppose Haaland? To me the clear implication is that he's teeing her up to answer those questions at her hearing tomorrow.

You're right, but everyone expects all Democrats to be on board from the beginning, given hardly anyone of significance has opposed any nominations. Also and therefore, because it's Manchin, the idea of him having issues with Haaland might be heuristically deduced.
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,454
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #578 on: February 23, 2021, 10:06:48 AM »

I’m no fan of Neera Tanden, but Joe Manchin voting to confirm Sessions and Kavanaugh but not Tanden or (possibly) Haaland has a very uncomfortable and blatant through line.

Yup, that's ridiculous. I think he wants to distinguish himself from his party, given WV's partisan lean (and shift). Not that I expect him to be in congress beyond January 3, 2025 anyway.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #579 on: February 23, 2021, 10:38:16 AM »

How's Haaland's hearing going?
Logged
BudgieForce
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #580 on: February 23, 2021, 11:19:39 AM »


I'm watching it currently and I have no idea.

As expected the Republicans are going hard on her and the democrats are throwing softballs. Manchin was at the very start and I couldn't get a good read on which way he was leaning.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,217


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #581 on: February 23, 2021, 11:25:14 AM »



Tom, typically the dogwhistles are intended to go over the heads of the liberals.

The implication behind Cotton's question is that supporting "racial equity" as opposed to "racial equality" means discrimination but woke.   Just in case that wasn't clear from the snippet or people aren't familiar with the debate on this.
No, racial equity is "when institutions give equal opportunities to people of all races. In other words, the structures, systems, practices and cultural narratives in society provide true situational fairness and equal opportunity for everyone regardless of their ethnicity or race". Currently, that is not the case in American society.
Nope Harris defined it as equal outcome. Then Biden started using it more. Pretty obvious what it means.
Logged
ηєω ƒяσηтιєя
New Frontier
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,229
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #582 on: February 23, 2021, 11:52:41 AM »

Nope Harris defined it as equal outcome. Then Biden started using it more. Pretty obvious what it means.
I don't know what you're referring to or talking about. Anyways, racial equity isn't a bad thing - it's what's needed in America.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #583 on: February 23, 2021, 12:09:33 PM »

Nope Harris defined it as equal outcome. Then Biden started using it more. Pretty obvious what it means.
I don't know what you're referring to or talking about. Anyways, racial equity isn't a bad thing - it's what's needed in America.

Okay, I guess I have to spell this out.

Conservative and libertarian thought tends to make a distinction between "equality of opportunity", which most people support, and "equality of outcome", which is controversial because it involves (or is perceived to involve) a certain amount of "positive discrimination" in favor of people or groups that are perceived to have a more disadvantageous starting position. The way progressives talk about equity sets a lot of center-right-to-right people off because it's perceived to indicate a desire to force better outcomes for some groups (which tend to be core Democratic constituencies) at the--again, perceived--expense of others. Add to this the general conservative distrust for specialized language and jargon--or, at least, for jargon that isn't conservative jargon--and you have a widespread lack of openness to the concept among people who don't already believe in it.
Logged
AndyHogan14
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 982


Political Matrix
E: -4.00, S: -6.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #584 on: February 23, 2021, 12:10:30 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2021, 12:13:49 PM by AndyHogan14 »

Linda Thomas-Greenfield is easily confirmed to her first position as representative to the UN Security Council, 78-20. There is now going to be a vote on limiting debate (cloture) on her second post as representative to the general assembly.

Later on in the afternoon, there will be a vote on Tom Vilsack followed by LTG's final vote.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,217


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #585 on: February 23, 2021, 12:25:26 PM »

Nope Harris defined it as equal outcome. Then Biden started using it more. Pretty obvious what it means.
I don't know what you're referring to or talking about. Anyways, racial equity isn't a bad thing - it's what's needed in America.


"Equitable treatment means we all end up at the same place"

Its such a pity Cultural Marxism has such anti-semitic tones because there needs to be a similar word for this.
Logged
ηєω ƒяσηтιєя
New Frontier
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,229
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #586 on: February 23, 2021, 12:25:31 PM »

Nope Harris defined it as equal outcome. Then Biden started using it more. Pretty obvious what it means.
I don't know what you're referring to or talking about. Anyways, racial equity isn't a bad thing - it's what's needed in America.

Okay, I guess I have to spell this out.

Conservative and libertarian thought tends to make a distinction between "equality of opportunity", which most people support, and "equality of outcome", which is controversial because it involves (or is perceived to involve) a certain amount of "positive discrimination" in favor of people or groups that are perceived to have a more disadvantageous starting position. The way progressives talk about equity sets a lot of center-right-to-right people off because it's perceived to indicate a desire to force better outcomes for some groups (which tend to be core Democratic constituencies) at the--again, perceived--expense of others. Add to this the general conservative distrust for specialized language and jargon--or, at least, for jargon that isn't conservative jargon--and you have a widespread lack of openness to the concept among people who don't already believe in it.
Yeah, I know all of that. My statement was referring to his comment about remarks from Kamala defining racial equity and "Biden started using it more". I don't know what he's talking about.

Anyways, regardless, it's just more consternating from conservatives. Meh.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,217


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #587 on: February 23, 2021, 12:26:46 PM »

Nope Harris defined it as equal outcome. Then Biden started using it more. Pretty obvious what it means.
I don't know what you're referring to or talking about. Anyways, racial equity isn't a bad thing - it's what's needed in America.

Okay, I guess I have to spell this out.

Conservative and libertarian thought tends to make a distinction between "equality of opportunity", which most people support, and "equality of outcome", which is controversial because it involves (or is perceived to involve) a certain amount of "positive discrimination" in favor of people or groups that are perceived to have a more disadvantageous starting position. The way progressives talk about equity sets a lot of center-right-to-right people off because it's perceived to indicate a desire to force better outcomes for some groups (which tend to be core Democratic constituencies) at the--again, perceived--expense of others. Add to this the general conservative distrust for specialized language and jargon--or, at least, for jargon that isn't conservative jargon--and you have a widespread lack of openness to the concept among people who don't already believe in it.
Yeah, I know all of that. My statement was referring to his comment about remarks from Kamala defining racial equity and "Biden started using it more". I don't know what he's talking about.

Anyways, regardless, it's just more consternating from conservatives. Meh.

And of course you ignore my post above despite it being a direct quote from Kamala Harris.
Logged
ηєω ƒяσηтιєя
New Frontier
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,229
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #588 on: February 23, 2021, 12:28:16 PM »



"Equitable treatment means we all end up at the same place"

Its such a pity Cultural Marxism has such anti-semitic tones because there needs to be a similar word for this.
Oh yeah, I remember this. There's nothing wrong with this video or what she said. LOL, you can cry about "cultural marxism" (which is far-right racist lingo) and "anti-semitic tones" (which is just a ridiculous assertion) but it's just a bunch of whining from butthurt conservatives to me.

Racial equity is a good thing.
Logged
ηєω ƒяσηтιєя
New Frontier
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,229
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #589 on: February 23, 2021, 12:29:04 PM »

And of course you ignore my post above despite it being a direct quote from Kamala Harris.
I posted that before I saw your post, smarty pants Roll Eyes
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #590 on: February 23, 2021, 12:31:48 PM »

I can’t find any real news about Haaland’s panel - not on NYT, WaPo, or Twitter. What are people seeing?
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #591 on: February 23, 2021, 12:34:49 PM »

I can’t find any real news about Haaland’s panel - not on NYT, WaPo, or Twitter. What are people seeing?

I listened to a brief section of it where Murkowski, Heinrich, and Lankford questioned her. Heinrich was obviously in favor, Lankford obviously opposed (but much politer about it than I was expecting), and Murkowski seemed skeptical but not dead-set against her. I haven't seen much about Manchin's comments but BudgieForce thinks he's still playing his cards close to his chest. Possibly waiting to see what Murk will do?
Logged
AndyHogan14
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 982


Political Matrix
E: -4.00, S: -6.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #592 on: February 23, 2021, 12:44:22 PM »

Cloture has been invoked for Linda Thomas-Greenfield's nomination (77-20) to be representative to the UN General Assembly with the final vote coming later on this afternoon. Earlier, she was confirmed (78-20) to be US representative to the Security Council. Vilsack's vote is expected to take place at 2:15 and right after that is when Thomas-Greenfield's final vote will take place.
Logged
BudgieForce
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #593 on: February 23, 2021, 12:47:05 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2021, 01:14:57 PM by BudgieForce »

I can’t find any real news about Haaland’s panel - not on NYT, WaPo, or Twitter. What are people seeing?

I listened to a brief section of it where Murkowski, Heinrich, and Lankford questioned her. Heinrich was obviously in favor, Lankford obviously opposed (but much politer about it than I was expecting), and Murkowski seemed skeptical but not dead-set against her. I haven't seen much about Manchin's comments but BudgieForce thinks he's still playing his cards close to his chest. Possibly waiting to see what Murk will do?

I wouldn't even go that far on Manchin.

Multiple republicans took shots at Haaland for past positions or comments, but Manchin didn't. I'm leaning towards Manchin being a yes on her nomination because of that.

There is another hearing on Haaland tomorrow. We might get a clearer picture on the way Manchin is leaning then.
Logged
AndyHogan14
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 982


Political Matrix
E: -4.00, S: -6.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #594 on: February 23, 2021, 02:18:55 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2021, 02:32:21 PM by AndyHogan14 »

Debate has begun for the Vilsack nomination. A vote will take place after 40 minutes of debate, so I'd say that the vote will probably take place at around 3pm ET.

EDIT: Debate wrapped up early (I probably should have expected that). They are voting now.
Logged
😥
andjey
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,510
Ukraine
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #595 on: February 23, 2021, 02:46:09 PM »

Sanders just voted NO on Vilsack's nomination
Logged
ηєω ƒяσηтιєя
New Frontier
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,229
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #596 on: February 23, 2021, 02:46:10 PM »

Bernie just voted NO on Vilsack's nomination. Interesting.
Logged
brucejoel99
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,448
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #597 on: February 23, 2021, 02:56:49 PM »

Bernie just voted NO on Vilsack's nomination. Interesting.

Eh, not really: Vilsack's gonna be overwhelmingly confirmed anyway, so Bernie has the leeway to be Bernie here.
Logged
ηєω ƒяσηтιєя
New Frontier
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,229
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #598 on: February 23, 2021, 03:06:23 PM »

Vilsack is terrible and shouldn't have been re-nominated to be AgSec but whatever, he's confirmed.


In other news:
Logged
AndyHogan14
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 982


Political Matrix
E: -4.00, S: -6.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #599 on: February 23, 2021, 03:09:07 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2021, 03:13:49 PM by AndyHogan14 »

Vilsack is easily confirmed 92-7 but he comes up just short of matching Lloyd Austin for the most voting "aye" (Austin got 93). The final vote for Thomas-Greenfield is happening right now.

The nays for Vilsack were:
Sullivan
Rubio
Scott (FL)
Paul
Hawley
Cruz
Sanders

EDIT: Shaheen was the Senator not voting.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 ... 82  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 10 queries.