Cancelling Student Loan Debt May Be The Only Way Biden Can Help Dems Win In 2022

C

Cinnabar

Verified User
A group of 85 Democratic lawmakers are pushing for President Biden to cancel up to $50,000 in debt for student loan borrowers, continuing to push the issue even as the administration pretends it isn't a problem. But these lawmakers have plenty of reasons to push for this plan, most notably the fact that they, and President Biden, need a serious win right now before we get into election season.

 
Thus driving the lesson that those who are financially responsible are chumps.

It looks all the world like the Chinese are already in charge.
 
Would the chumps who paid back their student loans think this is swell and vote D?

Dont count on it.
 
Cinnabar said:
A group of 85 Democratic lawmakers are pushing for President Biden to cancel up to $50,000 in debt for student loan borrowers, continuing to push the issue even as the administration pretends it isn't a problem. But these lawmakers have plenty of reasons to push for this plan, most notably the fact that they, and President Biden, need a serious win right now before we get into election season.
Click to expand...

What power does the president have to cancel loans?
 
Except, Biden can't change federal spending law. That's for the House to do. All federal spending legislation has to originate in the House. The President only carries out that legislation. He has no power to decide to ignore that law, unless this is just another thing the Left wants and really doesn't give a shit whether it's legal or not...
 
Flash said:
What power does the president have to cancel loans?
Click to expand...

None. The House would have to produce legislation to do that. The Senate would have to approve it, and the President would have to sign off on it. But when has legalities and the law ever been a roadblock for the Left?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Except, Biden can't change federal spending law. That's for the House to do. All federal spending legislation has to originate in the House. The President only carries out that legislation. He has no power to decide to ignore that law, unless this is just another thing the Left wants and really doesn't give a shit whether it's legal or not...
Click to expand...

This is a Revolution that does whatever the fuck they want to do, with few exceptions.

Maybe they will have the Fed do it so they can pretend that it is not illegal, who knows, but they clearly dont care about laws if they should get in the way.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
None. The House would have to produce legislation to do that. The Senate would have to approve it, and the President would have to sign off on it. But when has legalities and the law ever been a roadblock for the Left?
Click to expand...

Or, the right. Both parties use the same tactics to accomplish their goals. They both disguise "power" as moral principles.
 
Flash said:
Or, the right. Both parties use the same tactics to accomplish their goals. They both disguise "power" as moral principles.
Click to expand...

The difference is the press doesn't run cover for the Right like they do for the Left. If Trump tried this there'd be a hue and cry to the heavens about his criminal behavior. Biden gets a pass.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The difference is the press doesn't run cover for the Right like they do for the Left. If Trump tried this there'd be a hue and cry to the heavens about his criminal behavior. Biden gets a pass.
Click to expand...

You must not be reading the mainstream media. The critics always claim the media doesn't cover stuff but I always read about the stuff they are supposedly not covering. Those are the same people who claim they don't read the media---so how do they know if it is being covered?
 
Flash said:
You must not be reading the mainstream media. The critics always claim the media doesn't cover stuff but I always read about the stuff they are supposedly not covering. Those are the same people who claim they don't read the media---so how do they know if it is being covered?
Click to expand...

There're degrees of coverage. If the MSM sources put the story 40 minutes into an hour news broadcast or on page 10 of a newspaper, and gives it only scant attention, that's quite different from putting it close to leading on a broadcast or the front page of a paper and providing more depth. The former is often a fig leaf so they can point to their supposedly covering the story while making that coverage so barren as to be irrelevant, while the later gives the story more emphasis and meaning.

Also, the number of times the story runs is important in the same manner. Running it once, then it disappears, is different from running it daily for a week.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
There're degrees of coverage. If the MSM sources put the story 40 minutes into an hour news broadcast or on page 10 of a newspaper, and gives it only scant attention, that's quite different from putting it close to leading on a broadcast or the front page of a paper and providing more depth. The former is often a fig leaf so they can point to their supposedly covering the story while making that coverage so barren as to be irrelevant, while the later gives the story more emphasis and meaning.

Also, the number of times the story runs is important in the same manner. Running it once, then it disappears, is different from running it daily for a week.
Click to expand...

TV news seldom carries much news and repeats the same stories all day. Reading creditable newspapers that carry a lot of news is the only way to get real information. Most cable news sources are trash.
 
Flash said:
TV news seldom carries much news and repeats the same stories all day. Reading creditable newspapers that carry a lot of news is the only way to get real information. Most cable news sources are trash.
Click to expand...

As I like to say: If you get your news from television, you aren't getting the news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top