was as legally tight as possible then, no?

This is giving me BBB vibes. Where the admin initially pleasantly surprises folks with what they are driving for, then the shit is trimmed back.

Of course with BBB, we got to see the ins and outs of pure incompetence and corruption party-wide.

So you almost end up with the worst of both worlds, politically. Again, this is a very trimmed down version of that.


BBB aside, with all the time they spent deliberating this you'd think they'd have this air tight out of the gate.

I know your boy got his marching orders/tweet echo chamber notes to say "this is only 10% of borrowers!" but that still leaves a lot of folks frustrated/betrayed/etc.

A lot of people are going to respond like Legs.


>
>Note: you've been trying to push the silly idea that the
>Democratic party is more interested in fundraising than in
>delivering results. If that were the case, they would have
>stuck to their guns, claimed to be defenders of the people,
>let the SC chop the whole thing down, and then run on that
>through 2024 and beyond. Instead, they're taking a significant
>political hit to keep this 'progressive' idea afloat.

This is an unforced political hit, but you cheerleaders won't see it that way.

One of your problems (in addition to being an arrogant asshole) is that you think you know where folks are going to land on an issue because you put people in a box. Like when you were convinced I was a Bernie Bro for a loonnng time.

I've always thought student loan forgiveness was a political risk- and it doesn't do shit do address the actual problem. That said, I gave the Biden admin praise on how they did this initially...seemed like they hit the sweetspot.

They could have avoided this blowback by making it air tight upfront. They had plenty of time for that.

And if you don't think they are going to raise money off of this, I don't know what to say...