The White House threw cold water on the prospect of a sit-down between President Biden and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), arguing Wednesday that there’s nothing to negotiate and the Speaker should bring a bipartisan national security funding bill up for a vote.

“What is there to negotiate? Really, truly, what is the one-on-one negotiation about, when he’s been presented with exactly what he asked for?” press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a briefing with reporters.

“He’s negotiating with himself. He’s killing bills on his own,” she continued. “And if he were to put that bill that just came out of the Senate — the national security supplemental that doesn’t have border security in it because he said he didn’t want it, he changed his mind — it would pass. It would pass in a bipartisan way.

  • deft
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Dems dominate every election so far. Why do people keep saying that like they don’t?

    • paultimate14@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      5 months ago

      The Dems lost control of the house at mid-terms, and they only have a razor-thin margin in the Senate of 51-49 if you count the 3 independents as Dems (which is fair as they caucus together).

      I don’t see any domination, at least on a national level.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        There also hasn’t been a test of it on the national level yet. The November election will be that test. Some of the little elections that have been popping up since the Supreme Court’s abortion ruling have gone hard for Democrats when we might not otherwise expect it to. It still remains to be seen if that pans out on a larger scale.

        The thing about gerrymandering is that there is a trap built into the math. The way it works is to give your opponent a few very safe districts (like +40 for them), and then give yourself a long list of fairly safe districts (like +15 for you). However, if the vote trends hard for your opponent, those fairly safe districts are no longer safe and you lose everything. This is a real possibility with how badly votes have gone for the GOP in those smaller elections, but we’ll have to see.

        If just one of Trump’s criminal trials hands down a guilty verdict before the election, it becomes a likely possibility.

        • paultimate14@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          Oh yes of course that all makes sense, but it’s also all just speculation. The Dems have not dominated yet. In more than the 3 decades I’ve been alive, the Dems have only had a filibuster-proof majority of Congress, plus the presidency, for a handful of months.

          I’ve seen them win the popular vote and lose the presidency twice.

          I hope the Dems do dominate and shift the Overton window left. But I think we also need to be careful about the expectations and narratives carried online. Fascists love to spread the lie that the Dems have been in control for decades and accomplished nothing. So saying Dems have dominated elections when they haven’t (at least not nationally) is dangerous.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      They don’t dominate enough to overcome the structural advantages Republicans have due to our fucked-up quasi-democratic system designed at a time when everyone assumed state and local issues would be far more important than ideology.