comment: >
  
  They don't have a plan. There are only 3 ways to do this through cuts, 
  medicare/medicaid cuts which they have said they wouldn't do, 
  military cuts which is unlikely considering the political bend of that party, 
  and cuts to disaster relief like fema. 
  You could try hodgepodge cuts across other programs, but to hit the number they want to hit, something has to come from these programs (or taxes have to be increased, particularly on the top 10%).
context: They are going to try and cut Medicaid and SNAP (Food Stamps). Why?
  
  
  Medicaid and SNAP are means-tested programs designed for the needy. They are, in traditional terms, welfare. Medicare and Social Security are not seen as welfare because recipients (with exceptions) pay into these programs all of their lives and then retire. 
  
  
  Recipients of Medicare/Social Security tend to be older and vote more often. Any political party would probably be fearful of their votes.
  
  
  So, the Republicans will so after these programs. They want to scale back the social welfare state and they see this as their chance. >
  
  They have been gunning for Social Security for years.  They're just really careful of how they market it. >
  
  For anyone who's been paying attention over the past couple decades, it's obvious that there has never been a plan. They just say stuff because it sounds good then figure out details later. >
  
  This is basically true.
  It's also true that in trying to figure out the details, we can guess at what they're going to try to cut.
  ​
  They aren't going to want to touch defense, or medicare or social security.
  ​
  Medicaide will probably end up on the chopping block. Also SNAP and other benefits for the poor like section 8 and TANF. I would also expect them to take aim at the department of education, which is probably going to mostly manifest as cuts for disability programs since those tend to be relatively more expensive. School lunch assistance is also a likely target.
  ​
  And of course, the big one is going to be cutting or eliminating the Affordable Care Act.
  ​
  I expect Biden and Senate Dems to oppose basically all of this. The mostly likely outcomes are that they make some kind of "compromise" on a toothless committee that studies the deficit or something. Other likely outcomes are that McCarthy ends up just knuckling under or getting outmaneuvered, or that he totally shits the bed and causes a major recession. >
  
  
  he totally shits the bed and causes a major recession.
  
  im willing to bet money this is what happens. the GOP has nothing to lose by doing this, their voters are so ignorant of what goes on, they'll blame democrats. 
  corporations and the wealthy want a recession because it means consolidation at low prices. >
  
  TBH I think Biden is gonna mint the coin, or just say "I'm unilaterally raising the debt ceiling because the constitution says we are required to pay the debt, come and sue me." before that happens. >
  
  
  or just say "I'm unilaterally raising the debt ceiling because the constitution says we are required to pay the debt
  
  The president can't do that, all the executive can do is propose a budget. All spending has to either originate or pass the house as a matter of the constitution: Article 1 Section 8.
  It's important to point out this only became an issue in 1982 under Reagan because prior to him the nation had the 1884 Antideficiency Act which automatically passed the previous year's budget if a new budget couldn't be agreed on. Yes, republicans created government shutdowns in order to fuck the country just for short-term gains in the polls. >
  
  …But… the spending has already been approved. That’s what the budget did: it approved the spending.
  We just didn’t raise the debt ceiling when we approved the budget. >
  
  And the law says the President has to spend the money. The President can't just not spend money because he feels like it or doesn't like where the money is going.
  Given the choice between "you must legally spend money", and "you legally mustn't spend more money" (and cause a huge financial disaster in the process), the choice is obvious. >
  
  The money has already been spent, not just approved. The debt limit has no bearing on this at all, just whether the US Treasury can fulfill the obligations for things it's already spent money on. The mere threat of not fulfilling these obligations has severe reverberations as the US Treasury will not be seen as a bedrock financial institution anymore and investors may not be as keen to buy things like US T-Bonds. >
  
  Congress controls the budgetary process. Republicans are forcing an artificial crisis to try and get concessions to they can't win via a vote. Rather than this gimmick the House should do its job and pass a budget. There is already a process in place to negotiate spending. McCarthy & crew should abide by that process. 
  As for what Republicans want.....who knows? Republicans haven't made it clear. Republicans are comparing about the top line number but haven't addressed any real changes they'd  like to make. Vague references to "foreign aid" and "woke-ism"  have been made but everyone who actually follows this stuff knows there isn't actually any money there. Least not money that changes anything. >
  
  Similar to "domestic terrorism" and "white supremacy". At least we can agree that vague weightless statements are the worst. >
  
  And all of them should be hanged for treason. You didn't just automatically assume 70 million registered Republica voters supported these 200 idiots, did you? You wouldn't make generalizations about people based on their group identities, would you? Because that's your entire progressive narrative. Every person is an individual separate from their group, and should be treated as such. Does that suddenly change for your political opposition? Hang them all in a public forum. 
  Back to the point: Jan 6th was a joke. It's incredible that people perceive 200 morons rioting in the Capital and smearing poop on walls as a serious threat. Just 21 years ago, Islamic extremists hijacked 4 planes, put them into buildings, and killed over 2,000 Americans. All in a couple hours.
  But youre trying to convince me that 200 people unsupported by any serious organization, is the "biggest threat America faces" 😐 I think the biggest threat America faces is willful ignorance, like we see with you right here. 
  I bet more people die in a weekend from black on black violence in inner cities, than murders by white supremacists ANNUALLY. Guaranteed. In fact, I'll be back with that data. >
  
  
  You didn't just automatically assume 70 million registered Republica voters supported these 200 idiots, did you?
  
  We don't have to assume anything; they tell us. In polls and at the ballot box. Millions of Republicans believe in the same lie about the 2020 election being stolen that motivated the GOP's Beer Hall Putsch.
  
  You wouldn't make generalizations about people based on their group identities, would you?
  
  Why wouldn't we? Or are you trying to conflate choosing to be a fascist with being born a certain way?
  Anyway, the attempted coup on January 6th wasn't dangerous because of the number of people it killed. It's dangerous because they were trying to keep Donald Trump in power by lynching Congress before Congress could certify Biden's lawful victory.
  You know this, of course. You're just doing what fascists do; pretend their attacks on democracy and the rule of law weren't that big a deal. >
  
  I see your not a psychologist, but anyways temperament and personality can and is in fact dependant on physiology, so youre actually quite wrong there. Just as some people maybe creative, or industrious, some people maybe orderly and structured, which may manifests itself as "anti-immigration", as this person may not like change to tradition. Just as an example.
  Lets continue. Election deniers lost basically all their races in the midterms. Minority opinion in the conservative world, and many MANY large conservative voices have been speaking against election denial for months / years. Lets not forget the impeachment of Trump because Democrats thought he stole the election with Russian help in 2016. So, we are all pieces of shit you guys do it too 🙄😒
  No one cares about trump, except the minority group of conservatives, and the liberal media. You genuinely think we want to make Trump into dictator 😐 for what? What did Trump do to deserve worship? 😂 Too much anti-trump narrative has gotten to your head. They're telling you this so you are scared and vote Democrat 😂 Jesus man, people are getting played out here like a fiddle. 
  Do us a favor and continue focusing on Trump. We will go ahead and focus on '24. Btw, that demo lineup looking a liiiiiittle weak 😳🫣✌️ >
  
  
  Lets continue. Election deniers lost basically all their races in the midterms.Minority opinion in the conservative world, and many MANY large conservative voices have been speaking against election denial for months / years.
  
  They lost basically all their general elections, but they won plenty of primaries. "Many large conservative voices" have not spoken out against election denial.
  
  Lets not forget the impeachment of Trump because Democrats thought he stole the election with Russian help in 2016. So, we are all pieces of shit you guys do it too 🙄😒
  
  That's not why Trump was impeached. Trump was impeached once for trying to withhold vital military aid from the President of Ukraine in order to coerce him into helping Trump smear Biden. Later he was impeached a second time for inciting an attack on the capitol.
  Also, the claim was not that Trump "stole" the election; the election was legitimate insofar as the votes cast were legitimate. The claim is that the election was influenced by Russia in favor of Trump (provably true), and that the Trump campaign colluded with Russian agents in that process (very likely also true, but lacking concrete proof).
  So you lied twice there.
  
  No one cares about trump, except the minority group of conservatives, and the liberal media. You genuinely think we want to make Trump into dictator 😐 for what? What did Trump do to deserve worship? 😂 Too much anti-trump narrative has gotten to your head. They're telling you this so you are scared and vote Democrat 😂 Jesus man, people are getting played out here like a fiddle.
  
  This is a pretty inept attempt at gaslighting, I have to say. >
  
  Yes they have 😂 Are you claiming to consume more conservative media than I do? Can you start listing names of voices who approve Jan 6? I can sure list those who condemn. 
  Yes, you're right; my memory fails me.
  Did I attempt tho? 🤔
  Great convo. Did we get anywhere? Not sure. >
  
  
  Yes they have 😂 Are you claiming to consume more conservative media than I do? Can you start listing names of voices who approve Jan 6?
  
  So now you've moved the goalposts from "many major conservative voices are speaking out against election denial" to "name conservative voices who approve of Jan 6th".
  You're way too obvious, man. >
  
  If they don't condemn, they approve. You claim they don't condemn. Who? Name them. Since you know "their" stance >
  
  I don’t believe a single republican actually cares about the debt. It becomes a talking point only when there is a democratic president. The ‘budget hawks’ suddenly lose their voice the moment a republican potus is sworn in. This is performative politics, nothing more. 
  McCarthy and company have no intentions of doing anything good for the nation over the next two years. The general thinking is that if they can increase individual misery among the general population, they will then be able to blame it 100% on Biden and dems. 
  Unfortunately those tactics were far more effective before the days of the internet. If Kevin believes suburban housewives will blame Biden for a default on US debt, they are woefully misguided. Yes the republican base will literally believe anything Tucker Carlson says. But the base alone can’t win swing states. 
  Republicans will try to blame Biden but they are the ones who will be blamed. After all, Biden and dems raised the debt ceiling several time already during his presidency. Plus Biden is still potus and he has the bully pulpit. Republicans don’t even have a plan so the whole thing is purely political. >
  
  
  I don’t believe a single republican actually cares about the debt
  
  As a party republicans haven't even attempted to balance the budget since Eisenhower, and that goes for state-level as well. Take Texas, which says 'we've got no income tax' as if that's good when it benefits the super-rich and not the working class, but has among the nation's highest property taxes and still spends badly, to the degree even apologist institutions like cato institute rank them near the bottom of the nation in 'individual liberty'. >
  
  
  What can the Republicans cut that would also be accepted by Democrats?
  
  Nothing, the debt celling is mostly for theatrics. Neither side can afford to let it crash, and the other knows it. >
  
  True.  Massive increase in borrowing cost... >
  
  They don't want to cut spending. If they did, then they would have when they had a trifecta under Trump. Instead they cut taxes and blew an even bigger hole in the budget. These are just talking points they use to rile up their base who don't pay attention to anything Republicans actually do. >
  
  Republicans aren't trying to negotiate, they're holding our economy hostage because they only support extremism. Like Marge bitching on the news about Biden using the only power he had to lower gas prices after blaming him for them for the last year. >
  
  Well. They are oxymoron party and some would argue word oxy. >
  
  In this instance, Oxymoron is short for Oxycodone Morons. >
  
  They are looking toward people having a selective memory.  Some of us remember the deficit predicted to follow the huge tax cut for rich people and the businesses that are now feeding inflation with record profits >
  
  The GOP wants to cut all social programs that help poor people. That won't do fuck all to paying down the debt, but they don't care about that, as long as they & their owners are getting paid. >
  
  THIS.
  It's about hurting the poor. It's about creating a modern day serfdom. This has been the goal since Edmund Burke. >
  
  Does it hurt a group they don't care for, like the poor or a minority?  Then they will cut it.  Environmental protection?  Cut.  Consumer protection?  Cut.  Enforcement of business regulations?  Cut.  
  We have plenty of past actions of the Republicans to go on for this, there's no guessing.  They would never cut military spending.  
  I honestly can't think of Republican cuts in the last 20 years that didn't hurt the American people and make life harder for those in need. >
  
  If they were smart (they aren't) they would tackle waste and corruption in Military spending. This is something we should all agree on. >
  
  “Congressman Rusty MacBeth doesn’t support the troops.” Proceed to get primaried.
  What they all agree on is their reelection. They’ll use any opportunity to make it happen, they’ll even eat their own if they sniff out a weakness. >
  
  Not to be facetious, but it’s pretty obvious. The Republicans are always looking to cut safety net programs if possible. I mean, a core part of their platform is bitching about “handouts.” The only practical place to cut spending is the military but neither party seems interested in doing so; especially not Republicans. >
  
  There’s some performative whining from the Right about military spending on aid to Ukraine but I suspect that’s one of those “we only talk about stopping it if there’s no realistic chance of that happening” gambits. >
  
  The Democrats should listen to the republicans then immediately counter to repeal all tax cuts given to those with over 5 million in income from any source given by republican administrations and congress over the past 40 years. Problem solved. Basically every tax cut promoted by the man greatly responsible for this republican financial fiasco. His name is Grover Norquist.
  The right’s go to talking point is, “ The revenue will not make a difference”. Not true. Especially in the out years it will make a big difference. >
  
  Good old Grover Norquist. Wants to make government so small he can drown it in the bathtub. It would be a country of haves & have nots. Chaos & mayhem would reign. >
  
  Pretty much what we have. >
  
  Republicans will destroy our economy and then the global economy because they don't want to pay for the bill they already spent. 3 trillion from Trump's tax cuts alone. The time to negotiate the debt ceiling is before you spend the money. >
  
  
  Republicans will destroy our economy and then the global economy because they don't want to pay for the bill they already spent
  
  They already used their control over the budget to create the embassy attack fiasco which they then blamed Clinton for when she as Secretary of State warned them 9/11-inspired attacks were incoming. >
  
  Gonna second that the answer to this question lies in understanding the Two Santas strategy >
  
  I think that by now we should all be able to see through this bullshit. They're gong to raise the debt ceiling. They do this every time. Dems want to raise taxes on Corporations, but not really. Republicans want to cut spending, but not really. So they'll fight about who's right and wrong and in the end they'll raise the debt ceiling because it's easier to kick the can than it is to actually clean up the mess they made.
  Every. Damn. Time. >
  
  It’s “we need tax cuts” when they are in power and “we need spending cuts” when they aren’t. Been that way as long as I can remember. They have no interest in governing, just performative grandstanding. Still don’t understand why more people in this country haven’t figured that out. >
  
  They don’t care about the debt ceiling. If they did they would have cut spending when they had unified control of the government under Trump. They only play this card when democrats are in power. So the idea that they would be happy with specific cuts is a pipedream. The point is to hurt democrats. >
  
  Realistically? They're going to go after Social Security. They just are. They don't care if they can't actually accomplish it: they're more a party of memes than means now. They don't care if they can't actually accomplish the goal, because they're more about the messaging than anything else. >
  
  The Republicans want to enact changes they desire without going about it the standard way: getting enough people to vote for them so they can enact the policy changes. They'd rather threaten to tank the economy if they don't get the changes they want. This is by definition terrorism. >
  
  They got enough people to vote for them to control the House of Representatives. The legislative body constitutionally responsible for all new spending bills. >
  
  Kind of a non sequitur. >
  
  As soon as you find out, let me know.  Since even the Republicans don't seem to know.
  The only things you could cut that would make much of an impact are Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Social Security, and Defense.  Everything else is nickel and dimes. >
  
  And all the government is doing is shifting the cost... >
  
  They can cut nothing. There is no reason to negotiate here. The GOP has the votes to do what they need. No need for Dem involvement. Either the GOP tank the economy and they wear that scarlet letter, or they agree to make payments and to honor the debt. 
  What is there to negotiate here? The Dems say 'pay the damned bill'. The Reps say, 'Yeah we wanna pay the bill to and we know just like you that the bill need to be paid. But we want to get some concessions from you to do what we already both know we have to do.'   
  It's a stupid idea and the Dems DO NOT need to engage in this faux crisis. >
  
  They did the same to Trump