Everyone knows that when you are finally making progress for your interests in a negotiation, you immediately give up any leverage you have before receiving anything in return
It’s just simple politics
lmao this is the guy that they felt couldn't be allowed near the presidency at all costs. It's like the ultimate indictment of our diseased system that this absolute spineless wet noodle of a politician, who refuses to do more than meekly ask the machine to maybe be just a tiny bit less murderous and then backs down the instant he gets any push back, was who the ruling class considered so extreme and intolerable to their interests that they needed to pull out every stop to deny him power
That's really the chef's kiss sleeper joke of the tweet. I'll be chuckling at that all day.
and yet that's still the best america can do because anyone better gets murdered by the FBI
Ending the war by selling more arms to Saudi Arabia and turning the entire area to glass.
So is this good, did he actually extract a concession? Or is this just more of him being totally impotent..
Sounds like an agreement behind closed doors. So Bernie is basically just taking their word for it. Biden has never gone back on a promise before!
Succs love to do this. Give up leverage now for a promise of something later. Don’t give up the leverage until you have secured the bag! Actually, don’t give it up then either, just heighten the contradictions and push for more if you have some power to back it up.
Problem is succs don’t have the power. They have no genuine organized movement or labor power behind them. So they can’t do anything other than posture with statements and parliamentary tricks.
it sounds like they convinced him to back off when he had a slam dunk so...
well wouldn't it make more sense to force biden to at least veto it then?
No, it makes more sense to end the suffering. Having Biden veto it does not do that. Either get a veto proof proposal, or end it through negotiation. Force him to veto if neither pans out
biden has shown no real signs of ending it though. it would be better for organizers to force him to say that in a clear way, that forces it to get covered in the news.
Would it force news coverage? If this actually came to a vote, would we suddenly see a few Dems back off?
There isn't much leverage to work here.
I just don't see how it could possibly be better for Bernie to get this loose promise than passing an actual resolution to end US military support in a genocide.
Forcing a veto maybe has a 2% chance of snowballing into something that moves the needle, and there's no guarantee of that much. Maybe the logic is this will keep the issue alive, where a veto would basically close it for the foreseeable future. Maybe the idea is that this has a 2.5% chance of snowballing into something meaningful. I have a hard time faulting the guy for picking one lottery ticket instead of another.
I guess that's fair, but it seems like they'd rather have had the vote from the recent citations needed news brief. I think it's almost certain that Biden uses the lull to not change anything and let it simmer for a bit longer down the road.
I can see a good argument for pushing the vote, too, but both options are long shots at the end of the day. If there's no clearly better path, what is there to criticize?
If that's the case, he'll bring the vote in the "near future", with a republican house that would love to stick it to Biden
He backed down because the Biden Admin was whipping against it and clearly has the party behind them. It is as usual Not The Right Time to take action on this.
