https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1 ... 2171472896



GOP is taking the House, obviously, but I don't see it being by a huge margin at this point.

Yeah, not good considering the 19th has been redrawn to favor Democrats more in November. Turnout was low as well, as it was a special election, so the gap was only 5K votes.

However, Upstate new york has been trending bluer in general and may not be a good bellwether for everywhere in the country

Looks like that district was +1.5 Biden but +12 Democrats in congress election in 2020. So if compared to the latter the result (Democrats +2) isn't bad for Republicans.

I don't understand ticket splitting at all. Republicans and Democrats are so polarized at this point, I guess it makes sense if you just like the status quo and don't want either party to affect change

There are also unpopular candidates and there are still independents like me.

Terrific move today by cancelling $10k in student loan debt. Will help millions of actual people.

(I would've preferred it all to be cancelled, and with no limitations on salary, but alas...)

But also, he should've done $20k or more. Rs are already railing against it (even though they LOVE bailing out corporations) so just go all in my man. No point in appeasing the Right when no matter what you do they're going to flip out over it.

He probably doesn't have the power to do it like eviction moratorium, but they can try to sell this to the base a political move in the meantime, knowing that it possibly doesn't get struck down until after midterms.



If Supreme Court didn't go for eviction moratorium a year ago when COVID was a bigger deal it's hard to imagine them going for this

The policy proposal regarding interest is much more impactful than the $10k base removal. This also means Dems can still campaign on "canceling even more student debt!".

But also. Time to give JB some credit. He has resisted the dems who are off the deep end throughout his presidency and its definitely paying dividends

I dunno, I agree with Shack and think nothing actually happens.

There's no current law anywhere in the US that could be argued to even take this to court. You can't just take anything to the Court, LMAO.

Executive orders are subject to court’s understanding of laws in place. A President cannot do whatever he wants unless there is a prior law in place allowing him to as such rather it be an act or a part of the constitution. This is why Trump’s travel ban and build the wall movements went no where. An executive actions typically find themselves being the subject of a lawsuit. The previous student loans Biden forgave worked because they came from shady colleges that broke the law in taking people’s money without giving them a proper degree in place.

There's no law on the books to argue against this. That's my point. You can't say this is against the law without there being a law on the books saying it is.

What's the difference between this and Biden just passing Build Back Better by executive order? He wasn't allowed to do that, nor is he to just pass 300 billion spending via student debt relief.

Correct, there has to be something in place for him to make the executive order. There is, as Shack pointed out, but one could argue that it is a very loose interpretation of a previously existing act.

Because this isn't spending. My god folks, keep up. He's not GIVING people money, he's forgiving debt. Not only is it perfectly legal for him to do so, it's perfectly legal for him to forgive all of it if he wanted.

Passing a bill that is spending is just not even comparable lmao.

Even in the case of loans that the government completely owns, erasing someone's debt is essentially the same as the government giving them money.

In this case I believe a lot of loans are also owned by a private lender like a bank but guaranteed by the government. I presume the private lender in this case must be getting made whole when the government erases the student debt as otherwise it's like the government stealing from them by taking their loan and erasing it.

Biden cancelling debt affects the US financially in terms of the money coming in the future by people paying it back or interest. Why does he have the single handed ability to make financial decisions like that? That’s what dictators have.

Which is why it is subject to the courts

What do you think forgiving debt means? The government is going to pay off the banks using 300bn in additional tax dollars. Do you think the banks just are not going to get paid?

Stuff like this at this point of the pandemic seems outrageous to me

I'm honestly starting to think you people have zero critical thinking skills, or are just so utterly blinded by the idiocy of the right that you will literally suckle at the teet of fascism.

Claiming him cancelling a tiny amount of debt is being a DICTATOR? Holy shit my dude. Get a fucking grip. I know neither you or zwack go outside much but my god.

The President not having the power to just spend 300 billion because he says so is the difference between authoritarian countries and democratic ones, yes.

In regards to your critical thinking comment it seems clear from my POV that your peers on the far left have largely abandoned it, perhaps critical thinking/logic is seen as a tool favoring the more educated oppressor class, and must be overthrown to create equity? But of course, we are living in different realities here.

lol yes we are, holy shit man

If you're a person that will benefit from such a move, then great. But in the grand scheme it's not a helpful policy. It gives Biden a positive headline, but it's not a good precedent to set. What first world nations need is not more people going to college/university. It needs skills-based workers, not people with sport science degrees working at Applebees. So cancelling a load of debt isn't a good thing to let the new generation see that they also might get one day. You should go to university if your career demands it and if you can afford it, not just because your pals are and you want another 5 years before you need to grow up. And unfortunately, being that this policy only affects people earning under $75,000 per year, it will largely target those degree holders that probably shouldn't have gone to university anyway, because they've just wasted it and now do nothing related to their chosen academic field. Sure, there's always the few that were just unlucky, but we know going to university for many is just an excuse to party and prolong their teen years.

But obviously the main issue here is the college tuition. It's way too high, and should probably be capped, but then that will just encourage even more people to go, which isn't what America needs; a nation full of degree holders makes the degree about as valuable as a train ticket. So it's not an easy fix, but the U.S. has concocted this idea that "college degree = success", and it's just not true. Career management in high school needs to be improved, and hard work, determination, a proper life plan, etc. need to be encouraged over simply "going to college" as a means to reach the middle-class. But I get that it's difficult in a world of employers that state you need a college degree to be an office assistant or something equally mundane. So that needs fixing, too, but I'm not sure what government can do to fix that. I guess it's a long road of employment sector awareness and marketing, but that takes years.

Kids have become huge sources of income for universities (absurd tuition costs), banks/lenders (absurd interest rates), and businesses (money saved on training, etc.) over the decades in America. And all these guys don't want something to disturb their well-oiled, money-grabbing machine they've created, so nothing will get done to actually fix the problem as those in power to fix the problems won't since it means *they* won't be profiting off all this either.

-Keep the number of well-paying jobs artificially limited by requiring college degrees where they aren't always needed.
-Keep the pay artificially low for many non-degree jobs.
-Keep career management and skill-training limited (or even excluded) in high school. Try to give push them into college even faster with college credit courses.

Limiting a person's options allows them to funnel these kids into the money pit they've created.

Obviously there are careers where years of higher education/training is required, but so many has been included in this that just isn't necessary if basic skill training would be available in high school and/or by the businesses themselves.

-Only require college degrees when necessary. (Some basic job training can prepare many for some of these jobs.)
-Prepare high school students better. (They don't need X amount of art credits, they need career-based classes.)
-Abolish the minimum wage and make it an inflation-scaled base of pay. (If lower-wage jobs pay matches inflation, where simply working full-time in one job pays the bills, fewer will seek out college for a better paying job if their needs are met.)
-Cap tuition costs. (Tuition has more than tripled since the 1970s, even after accounting for inflation. That's a ridiculous lack of management / lack of oversight.)
-Cap interest rates / Cap % for payments. (It's become a predatory industry by this point.)

I really wish Republicans would ditch Trump. They'll hopefully learn their lesson when the underperform this year, but never underestimate Republicans ability to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory

They need to look at how Desantis and Youngkin have united the Republican base and moderates and proceed from there. Moderates don't like Trump like they did in 2016 and they are unlikely to vote for MAGA candidates even if they otherwise like Republicans/conservatives