“We’ve got to be able to think through, ‘What are the key issues that we could do?'” he said. “We don’t know what the makeup [of government’s] going to be. The American people will decide that in November, but we should starting talking about it, starting with taxes.”

Extending the Trump-era tax cuts, which expire at the end of next year, is at the top of the list, but Republican senators are also pitching a big increase in defense spending and cuts to mandatory government spending to reduce the projected federal deficit.

Cornyn pitched his colleagues on tackling mandatory spending, which is authorized outside the annual spending bills passed by Congress each year and is growing at a rate of 7 percent annually.

“We’ve tried to deal with spending just looking at discretionary spending. Actually, discretionary spending has not jumped up nearly as much as mandatory,” he said.

Cornyn said both Biden and Trump have made it clear they don’t want to cut Social Security or Medicare, but he says there are other programs that need reform.

“I think it’s worth looking at other mandatory spending,” he said. “It is an entitlement and has been growing at like 7 or 8 percent a year. And so there’s about $700 billion in non-Social Security, non-Medicare mandatory spending that I think we should look at it.

He is also pushing a big increase in defense spending to get around Democrats’ opposition to increasing funding for the Pentagon without “parity” for nondefense and social spending programs.

“I’ve been [paying] attention to what [Mississippi GOP Sen. Roger] Wicker is saying about the need to spend more for defense,” Cornyn told reporters Tuesday, referring to the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and his goal to increase defense spending from 2.9 percent of gross domestic product to 5 percent over the next five to seven years.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), who will step down from his leadership position at the end of the year, on Wednesday called reconciliation “an important tool.”

“The first step is we need to have a Republican president, a Republican House and Republican Senate, or there will be no reconciliation at all. It is an important tool. We hope to have an opportunity to use it,” he told reporters.

Some political handicappers now see Trump as favored to defeat Biden and Senate Republicans as likely to return to the majority, given the retirement of West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin (I), who recently left the Democratic Party.

An election forecast model released by The Economist on Wednesday gave Trump a 2 in 3 chance of winning the White House. It gave Biden a 1 in 3 chance of victory.

The results are similar to a forecast model from Decision Desk HQ and The Hill released late last month. In that model’s most recent update, Trump holds a 56 percent chance of winning the presidency.

Meanwhile, handicappers see the battle for the House as a toss-up.

The nonpartisan Cook Political Report says there are 22 toss-up races in the House, with 11 Republican seats and 11 Democratic seats viewed as most in play.

“The principle focus in the lunch was, if and when we have Republican majorities in the House and Senate, that we should hit the ground running with a positive, progrowth, projobs agenda that focuses on tax reform and regulatory reform,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said after the meeting.

But some Republican senators are trying to temper their colleagues’ expectations for what could be accomplished next year if Republicans control the White House and Congress.

Senate GOP Whip John Thune (S.D.) cautioned that policy-focused legislation that only has a tangential impact on the revenues, spending or the deficit would likely fail to meet the so-called Byrd Rule and would not be eligible to pass the Senate with a simple majority under budget reconciliation.

“The big issue obviously, and one of the reasons he’s here, is to talk about a potential budget reconciliation process,” Thune told reporters.

But Senate rules limit what kinds of proposals Republicans could put into such a package to circumvent a Democratic filibuster, Thune warned.

“You have to keep your expectations realistic about what you can do there. It has to be, obviously, spending and revenue, budgetary,” he said. “We have restrictions over here that the House doesn’t have, to comply with under the Byrd Rule. There’s a lot tighter screen on what you can and can’t do” through the budget reconciliation process in the Senate.

Thune pointed out that the Senate parliamentarian rejected several legislative proposals Senate Democrats tried to fit into a reconciliation package when they controlled the White House, Senate and House in 2021 and 2022.

“There were several things that got thrown out that the Democrats tried to do,” he said.

“They wanted to raise the minimum wage, they had a DACA thing in there and they had their clean power plan. All of those things got knocked out by the parliamentarian,” he said, referring to ambitious plans by Democrats to give migrants who came to the country at a young age a path to citizenship and to reduce power plant emissions.
___

>>1303812
>He is also pushing a big increase in defense spending to get around Democrats’ opposition to increasing funding for the Pentagon without “parity” for nondefense and social spending programs.
>“I’ve been [paying] attention to what [Mississippi GOP Sen. Roger] Wicker is saying about the need to spend more for defense,” Cornyn told reporters Tuesday, referring to the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and his goal to increase defense spending from 2.9 percent of gross domestic product to 5 percent over the next five to seven years.
inb4 forever war with Iran

>>1303832
>Johnson, whom most MAGA and non-RINO GOP and moderates despise as a traitor wants to go to war for Israel
Are you surprised? He's a dispensationalist. His ilk are everything that lefties and libs fear about bible belt crazies. The only thing that gets him erect is the prospect of sending Americans do die for a biblical end times holy war with Israel's enemies.
I don't know how these fucking jackasses didn't see what he was for the color of his feathers before they appointed him. He's every bit worse than the guy they used him to replace.

>>1303871
The quote is actually from Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who is even worse than Mike Johnson. He says Biden has "turned his back on Israel" lmao
https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/important-updates/the-war-in-israel/

>>1303899
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IOoxq6wAvI

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/13/donald-trump-conviction-mike-johnson-00163128
>Trump’s private demand to Johnson: Help overturn my conviction

>>1303810
>Johnson, Trump, GOP plot ambitious agenda hinged on total control of government
>previous midterms: the 'Red Wave' that wasn't a trickle
Good luck with that, Repubicans.

>>1303815
related: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/inside-congress/2024/06/12/republicans-reckon-early-with-their-reconciliation-limits-00163047

>House members are already sketching out a wish list that includes addressing the expiration of Trump-era tax cuts, which will trigger some angst about their possible multi-trillion-dollar price tag. Other ideas getting floated are regulatory rollbacks, a Pentagon budget boost, domestic spending cuts, border security investments, changes to mandatory spending programs like Medicaid, a reversal of Obamacare and Inflation Reduction Act policies … and more.

>“The challenge,” Thune told us, is that the House doesn’t need to heed the Senate rule that limits what can be accomplished with the special budget maneuver. “So they can take sort of a wider lens on this and say, we can pack all these things in reconciliation. And we are talking with them. I think they need to understand what the limitations are going to be.”

>The House counterargument: Republicans across the Capitol push back that Democrats went big with their last two reconciliation packages, and so can the GOP.

>“When Democrats were in control, the parliamentarian’s determination on what was reconcilable was pretty expansive,” said House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas).

>“The Byrd rule was interpreted pretty broadly for the Inflation Reduction Act,” echoed House Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), referring to the parliamentary restriction on reconciliation’s use in the Senate.

>The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 is an interesting choice as an anecdote for a slam-dunk reconciliation attempt. Enacting that climate and spending package was neither quick nor painless for Democrats – in fact, they wrestled with its contents for well over a year, amid dissent from Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and the upper chamber’s parliamentarian.

>>1304028
Well, no matter what happens, you'll be prepared to say the GOP cheated.

>>1304037
Post 5 examples

>>1304045
He can't because no one actually said that

>>1304037
Why do you project 100% of the time

>>1304052
You already know why

>>1304064
Why?

>>1303899
>>1303932
Cornyn is probably going to be the top Republican leader in the Senate after McConnell retires next year.

>>1304129
not really
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-replacement-senate-republican-leader/

>>1304037
>This is your brain on Rethuglicanism, and why >>1304037 is living in a certain river in Egypt post-their much-prayed for 'Red Wave' that didn't even moisten the GOP
Rightist thinking. Not even once.

>>1303810
So members of Congress discuss what their ambitions will be once their constituency elects members of the party they represent.Ok, what a shocker.

>>1304220
I'm not sure why you just sarcastically summarized the content of the article as though you were making a point.

>>1304045
Bush.
Bush again in 2004.
Trump in 2016.

>>1304233
chud headcanon is so sad

>>1304237
Hanging Chads.
Accusing Jeb Bush of interference.
Supreme Court.
John Kerry conceding before the count is finished.
Russian Collusion.

>>1304240
Trump did conspire with the Russians and continues to work in their best interests.

>>1304244
No evidence of that was ever found.
If anything the person who conspired the most with Russians has been Biden. Stopping all oil exports to Europe forced them to buy oil from Russia which funded his Ukraine invasion. Uh-oh, stinky!!

>>1304245
>No evidence of that was ever found.
See
>>1304237

>>1304246
Saying stupid shit is not evidence of wrong-going. Nor is going, "YUH HUH!" or whatever other childish crap you idiots on this board pull when you can't properly debate.

>>1304247
That's exactly what you did.

>1304249
Here's your last reply, dumbass.

I accept your surrender.

>>1304245
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_Trump_in_Russia

can't seem to find a wiki page on biden and russia.

>>1304260
Now this is schizoposting.

>>1304263
>Trump revealed intelligence secrets to Russians in Oval Office - officials
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN18B2MM/

>>1304265
>no evidence

>>1304266
>if I ignore the evidence there is no evidence

>>1303812
Even if they eliminated all 700 billion of Non-social security, nom-medicare spending, they're proposing spending about 1.3 trillion dollars on the military, which would be an increase of about 500 billion, meaning they'd have 200 billion to put towards our national debt of 34 trillion dollars. Great plan.

>>1304283
He said, she said isn't evidence.

>>1304288
Your memory is incredibly short as usual.
https://www.npr.org/2017/05/15/528511980/report-trump-gave-classified-information-to-russians-during-white-house-visit

>>1304292
>https://www.npr.org/2017/05/15/528511980/report-trump-gave-classified-information-to-russians-during-white-house-visit
According to the article:
>The Post, citing current and former U.S. officials, reported Monday evening that the information relayed by the president to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak "jeopardized a critical source of intelligence" on ISIS:

>"citing current and former US officials"
Aka "he said, she said."

>>1304294
Ahh so you're retarded. Got it.

>>1304300
"because someone said so" isn't evidence of wrongdoing. Unless you think gossip counts as evidence because ORANGE MAN BAD.

>>1304303
>"I don't know what anonymous sources are because I'm not American" the post

>>1304304
Second and third hand gossip doesn't count as evidence. Trump doing something because someone said he did it doesn't count. Without evidence, then it's just a lie.
>bUt It'S aN aNoYmOuS SoUrCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!oneone
Any evidence to back up their claim? No? Then it didn't happen.

>>1304305
You shouldn't be allowed to post on this board until you learn basic journalistic principles.
https://www.spj.org/ethics-papers-anonymity.asp

>>1304306
Again: Just because someone said it happened, doesn't mean it did. You need more than just an accusation to prove guilt, dumbass.

>>1304314
What's it like being the extremist minority?
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/10/09/most-americans-see-a-place-for-anonymous-sources-in-news-stories-but-not-all-the-time/
>A majority of U.S. adults (82%) say that there are times when it is acceptable for journalists to use anonymous sources, with 67% saying it is acceptable only in special cases – a view which echoes the standards of professional journalism organizations that say journalists should take every step to attribute information to a named source when possible before relying on an anonymous source. A much smaller share – 15% – thinks use of anonymous sources is always acceptable. About two-in-ten Americans (18%) think it is never acceptable.

>>1304315
Just because a source claimed it happened, it doesn't mean it did. Are you saying that it's not possible for these people to lie?
Where's the corroborating evidence? How do we back up these accusations with fact? Do we try to prove it actually happened? Talk about a lack of journalistic integrity.

>>1304318
Holy fuck this is some peak denialism. It happened whether you believe it or not, kiddo. Cope. The world will move on without you.
>Talk about lack of journalistic integrity
KEK allow me to quote the Society of Professional Journalists:
>Anonymous sources are sometimes the only key to unlocking that big story, throwing back the curtain on corruption, fulfilling the journalistic missions of watchdog on the government and informant to the citizens.

>>1304319
So you're saying that all accusations are factual? Any accusation? What investigation was done on behalf of ANYONE in this story to prove that the anonymous sources were telling the truth? ANYTHING???? Anything at all??????

>>1304321
I'm saying
>About two-in-ten Americans (18%) think it is never acceptable.
This is talking about (You). Coincidentally about the same amount of people thought Nixon did nothing wrong in Watergate. Next you'll tell me that also didn't happen because it was based on anonymous sources.

>>1304322
That doesn't address my point at all. I'm not discussing whether anonymous sources are good, or bad. I'm saying whether a simple accusation is enough to be considered proof of anything.

>>1304323
Gee cletus why don't you read the huge article I linked earlier on the ethics of anonymity in journalism from the society of professional journalists and find out
https://www.spj.org/ethics-papers-anonymity.asp

>>1304324
In what was does that corroborate what these sources have claimed about Trump's actions?
You cannot prove anything from accusations alone.

>>1304325
Conversely, no one has to prove it to you for it to be true. No one here cares if you believe it or not. It happened either way. Good luck with your denialism.

>>1304326
So it was real in your mind? A simple accusation without proof is enough to condemn? Would you say the same were you in that position?

>>1304327
More like it was real in everyone else's mind except yours. I'm out, don't bother replying.

>>1304328
Real because of what? The simple accusations of an anonymous source? The things you people will believe simply because of who is being accused.

>>1304331
You're talking to an anon who is willing to believe whatever the lugenpresse tells him, because he was determined to hate Trump from the beginning. It doesn't matter whether or not what they said was true, only that he believes it, because he believes that reality is shaped by consensus. He is unwilling to entertain any alternative for that reason.

In reality, the Clinton campaign was fined because they invented the Steele Dossier out of thin air. So all of the Russian collusion bullshit was factually a disinfo campaign.

>>1304391
wrong board faggot
>>>/pol/

>>1304314
you keep putting yourself in a smaller and smaller box. its amazing to see.

>>1304391
>lugenpresse
Ah yes, the lying press which Trump stole from Hitler and renamed it fake news. Any news that didn't fit his narrative was deemed fake, meanwhile his favorite Fox News has stated twice under oath that they are not news, then settled out of court with Dominion, AKA admitting guilt, to lying about the 2020 election and giving them 787.5 million dollars.

Every accusation is an admission with republicans.

>>1304425
Yet the inverse can be said by the otherside about you.
Are you even capable of seeing that? Do you not know how this works yet?

>>1304455
Use more nazi buzzwords next time

>>1304465
Enjoy your sports team distraction.

>>1304466
Your redpill syndrome is acting up again, Howard.

>>1304467
Enjoy being young. It never lasts.

>>1304468
I'm not young.

>>1304470
You sure? You talk like you're a 17-19 year old college freshman. All angry bluster and kneejerk reactions.

>>1304617
Pretty sure it's the 17-19 year olds unironically using nazi buzzwords

>>1304621
"Unironically" is something that 17-19 year olds say.

>>1304634
According to whom?

>>1304637
Everyone who isn't a retarded zoomer or a shareblue shill in his late 30s who can't get a job anywhere else after the horrifyingly bad sex change.

>>1304638
How did you get such a specific boogeyman to live rent free in your head? Did you place an ad?

>>1304652
Oh right. You're totally here having a legit discussion about mainstream politics.

>>1304673
That isn't the point of this board, /pol/kun

>>1304676
No, it's to have barely coherent shitflinging flame wars over mainstream politics.

>>1304680
It's right there in the sticky, /pol/kun
>Please note that news, news articles, and current events can also be discussed on /pol/; however /news/ is exclusively for recent news articles, and not general discussions of politics, social phenomenon, or world events.
This isn't blue /pol/

>>1304685
Sure feels like it.

>>1304690
Tell me more about your feelings.

>>1304765
Sometimes when they say mean words it hurts inside my tummy.

>>1304765
I feel like you're a gigantic, disingenuous faggot that's intentionally missing the point.

>>1304797
So you're saying you have feelings for me? Awwwww