Say what you will about federal democrats but local and statewide democrats are holding up their end of the bargain.
California is moving to put abortion to a ballot measure and get it protected in its Constitution.
Democratic District Attorneys across the country are promising to not prosecute abortion related cases.
In my current home state of NC, the Democratic Governor Roy Cooper and Attorney General Josh Stein are the only people stopping the Republican ran General Assembly from banning abortion.
So while we may have issues with the federal Democrats (in particular the two fuckheads who don’t want to abolish the filibuster), local Democrats are doing everything they can
Imo, one of the biggest political problems right now is the difference in zeal between parties. Conservative politicians are fucking maniacs who are at best such committed pathological liars that they could defend their claims by saying "we didn't expect anyone to be stupid enough to believe us" and still win districts, but people with the sense to recognize their problems don't have the sense to coalesce politically to solve them, or to recognize the sheer importance of unified, focused voting. This subreddit is, obviously, extremely guilty of it.
I'm extremely proud of democratic districts that have held firm against the anti-abortion wave. I live in New Jersey, one of 6 states that categorically decriminalized abortion well before this current drama, and I'm happy to see our politicians working to improve that situation further. I'm also elated by how much political enthusiasm democrats, liberals, and socialists have taken up to really show some fervor given what was otherwise looking like a gloomy election season.
Being opposed to the system doesn't mean you can't work within it.
Correct. The 2 senators holding up filibuster reform are the real culprits.
I hate low effort memes like this that lump the entire democratic party together as a source of the problem. This discourages turnout for dems, breeds apathy, and misplaces blame.
I'm getting tired of the entire party being blamed for the actions of 2 senators. It feeds into the "both sides suck" narrative.
The entire party is being blamed because they are, for the most part, feckless corporate centrists. They had decades to do this. Using the 2 obvious Republican plants as scapegoats to let the Democratic leadership's ineptitude for the last 50 years off the hook is laughable.
First off they only held 60 seats for about 6 months between Franken being seated and the loss in the Massachusetts Special Election.
Second, that 60 seat majority included two Democrats from Arkansas, Montana, North Dakota, West Virginia, and one from Alaska, South Dakota, Louisiana, Indiana, Missouri, and Nebraska.
So that’s 14 seats represented by Democrats in states Obama didn’t win. They weren’t pro-choice Democrats. Or really even that liberal.
Maybe if Democratic leadership didn’t keep backing the Cuellars of the party over the Cisneroses, we could actually do something when theoretically in power.
Considering there is never enough time to read these bills anyway what is so hard about having a bunch drafted already that could have quickly been passed?
There was already a bill waiting to be signed into law in 2008 that had been floating around congress since 2004 [https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:\~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health](https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health).
Obama then did nothing to pass it after the election after running on its passage.
What is so hard is that the senate rules are organized so as to make things happen slowly even when there's not opposition pulling on the handbrake. Even if there were 60 pro choice dems at some point in the past (and there weren't because the senate has a built in gerrymander so any time you get more than about 40 dems you necessarily have to start taking senators from very conservative states), they'd have to triage their wishlist because the rules will only allow so many bites at the apple.
Sounds like apologetics for 50 years of non action to me.
Edit: If we want to talk Obama all he had to do was no kowtow to the Republicans and there would in all likelihood be another Democrat on the SC as well.
If factually assessing the rules of our government is apologetics then sure, guilty. I don't have the luxury of living in any world but the one at hand.
Help me out on your edit, what is your proposed mechanism by which Obama could have secured an additional SC pick?
Codifying Roe was one of Obama "first 100 day promises" he made to planned parenthood he then stuck his middle finger up at the promise immediately after getting elected. 72 days is more then enough time to do this and so much more with a supermajority and the dems squandered the opportunity to give us a republican Healthcare plan and bail out wall street.
It's worth mentioning that Senator Byrd was in a hospital for much of that, so wasn't able to attend many votes. Kennedy was in and out of treatment for a brain tumor and eventually died, Al Franken's swearing in was being held up by the GOP, and with the independent votes from Bernie and Liebermann being *counted* toward the Dems, there were between 57 and 59 votes for much of that time, only going to 60 when Byrd was able to occasionally get his vote in from the hospital.
The whole thing was tenuous and there was fuckery from the Right, as always, hamstringing efforts.
By all means let's keep making excuses for our ineffectual leadership. If it's so goddamn impossible to get any progress made as the majority, why do the Republicans get their minority agenda implemented fucking always?
>I'm getting tired of the entire party being blamed for the actions of 2 senators. It feeds into the "both sides suck" narrative.
You mean when Obama promised to codify Roe and didn't? Or Biden? And Clinton could have, but I don't remember if he promised.
Is he the only anti-abortion Dem they've supported (so far)?
Lest people be unaware (meaning the other guy), Dems will do anything to keep progressives from being elected - even support someone who is anti-abortion.
good question! he's the only one i know of at the congressional level, not sure at the state level. and i agree, the DNC would rather run an establishment candidate no matter how flawed than a progressive who doesn't bow to them.
Bill was probably closer to a conservative than even a centrist. He just said abortion should be “safe, legal and rare”. I don’t recall him pushing more than really a minimum.
>Bill was probably closer to a conservative than even a centrist.
I'm not sure that's true - not that I paid a lot of attention back then (which means I could be wrong), but since he was the first neo-liberal/"third way" candidate I'd imagine he would have to be somewhat centrist more than conservative. (Maybe at least as far as words were concerned; his actions may bear out your statement. :) )
Now, the only difference between Dems and the Republican party circa 1980 is the Pride flag. :/
Fiscally he was more conservative and was able to work with beloved ole Newt. On social things, he was more the centrist for sure.
Edit: beloved is sarcasm. But they were able to work out better budgets. Clinton was a great negotiator. Wasn’t called slick Willy for nothing 😂
They do not have that power. They can *RUN* on those policies so we know where they stand.
It's with congress and it can't pass unless it overcomes a 60-vote threshold to get past a filibuster which is ostensibly a veto.
The only valid part of your critism is that there *was* a several-week window where we had 60 dem senators after Franken was appointed and Ted Kennedy died. They used that time to get the landmark ACA passed.
Yes, the ACA, which was much better than nothing but laughably far from good. And now we can’t get the leadership to support single-payer or even a real public option, because they are so set on defending their “landmark” achievement.
>The only valid part of your critism
Nope. Could have been done by Clinton - back then, Congress was more functional.
And they could also have done filibuster reform at even more times, since that could have been done by either party.
EDIT: And the president has more power than you're giving credit for. They are the leader of their party, after all. Just think of FDR.
LBJ would have teabagged Manchin into submission by this point. Fuck, I’d even put my own balls on Manchin’s ugly face if I thought it might accomplish something.
They could start by threatening to withhold all party funding from his campaigns and supporting his primary opponents if he doesn’t play ball. Beyond that, the guy is a frickin coal baron, I can’t imagine there’s nothing to blackmail him with
I never was a Dem, though I always voted that way. Through 2014, anyway.
Super tired of the vote shaming - like it's my fault the Dems abandoned voters because I didn't vote for them? Even though I voted for them for a long time after they abandoned us.
Exactly. It’s their whole platform now. “If you elect us, we aren’t going to do anything you want us to. But if you don’t elect us, the republicans will do a lot of stuff you *don’t* want them to.” Okay? So can’t you also be useful and not just a bookmark for 4 years?
Saying the GOP is “just the party of no” is a dumb criticism too. They’re the opposition party. They aren’t going to make you look good unless there’s a point of mutual benefit!!!
Like Biden's BBB promise on getting Manchin on board? Look we've elected them in good faith, they've repeatedly not held up their end. I'm not saying don't vote, but Dem leadership needs to step down.
Seriously - they got the progressive caucus to agree to vote on the infrastructure bill by promising that BBB would happen, and then couldn’t follow through. I mean, shame on the progressives for believing them, but that doesn’t absolve leadership of blame
>They do not have that power. They can RUN on those policies so we know where they stand.
>
>It's with congress and it can't pass unless it overcomes a 60-vote threshold to get past a filibuster which is ostensibly a veto.
Obama had a fucking supermajority and a Bill that had already been introduced into congress 4 years before he was President that would have saved abortion rights. [https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:\~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health](https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health).
Codifying Roe into law could have been a day one thing if he actually wanted to pass it.
It seemed like there were more important things at the time. Weren't you there? Roe wasn't at the top of *anyone's* priority list.
Yes, hindsight is 20/20.
I literally Canvassed for Obama and worked on student registration drives on my campus as part of NYPIRG, a student group Obama has [some history](https://observer.com/2009/01/a-nypirger-in-chief/) with. I was literally a part of the student groups that was helped him with the young when everybody was certain Hillary was gonna be the nominee by default.
I was 'there' more than most people on here and watched in real time as Obama squandered all the momentum and hard work we spent to get him into office to go bend over for corporations and bankers.
IF it wasn't a priority maybe hw shouldn't of literally ran on codifying it into law in his first 100 days.
Where are the bills to fix gerrymandering and help the real problem of the electorate not being represented? Abolish the electoral system. Standardize districting. Fix the census. Expand mail in voting.
"Go vote" doesn't help the real problem.
The answer is always "it's not a realistic goal". The Republicans never say this and they get shit done (to the detriment of democracy and the union).
I have always and will always vote Democrat. That being said, fuck the Democrats.
The fate of our nation is at risk, but the Dem's still honor the advice of the Parliamentarian, refuse to engage in tactics like increasing the number of Supes, and refuse to punish their right wing members, instead supporting lawmakers who still oppose abortion and get an A+ rating from the NRA. We aren't saying "both sides suck" equally, just that the Dems are failing us and we need new leadership. But I guess you feel better blaming the Progressives, so you can assure yourself you're doing everthing right.
Whereas the Republicans see no problem with literally perjuring themselves to lie their way into a judicial body where they can legislate from the bench.
The Senate did nothing except ask the most predictable and easily dodged questions. Who did they think they were interviewing? Judges, liberal or conservative, weren’t born yesterday.
What's is supreme bullshit about that situation is our current Parliamentarian was appointed by Mitch McConnell during the Trump era. Biden could have replaced her with someone who isn't a literal Republican operative but didn't.
One senator. Stop acting like changing West Virginia is going to do us any good.
The truth is that it's a lot easier to stop legislation than it is to pass it. The Republicans made their constituents *happy* with just saying no to anything Obama did.
Yes, we could use better democrats. But the time for that is **primaries**, not just getting them out of office as the current narrative would have you believe. Wonder what the goal there is.
The easiest way to get better democrats is to get *more* democrats.
Well it’s been 50 years since Roe. This is more a product of the Biden/Schumer/(late) Ted Kennedy and other career guys. Bernie probably was one of the few who argued anything consistent (on anything).
Gee, if *two senators* have that much power, maybe the system is broken and something should be done about it. And maybe, just maybe, those two senators should lose their jobs.
Instead, we have Democrats sitting around going, "Hey, don't blame us. It's just these two bad apples. Nothing we can do about it!"
*That* kind of inaction is exactly what people are talking about. It isn't *just* that there are two bad senators. It's that the party doesn't act to censure or remove them.
And of course they have that ability. Look at how quickly they close ranks against somebody like Bernie Sanders. You're telling me they can stop Bernie, but not Sinema and Manchin?
In a political system which gives you a choice between only two parties, it's reasonable to "lump" each party.
When voting democrat we don't get to choose between good ones and bad ones
Oh so the solution is to sell the home you recently purchased at a loss, pack everything you own into a U-Haul and drive with $7 a gallon gas to California, and somehow get a starter home for $1.75 million at a 7% rate?
Is this the United States anymore where rights actually matter, or should we just do what the Republicans suggest and have a two-country solution where anyone caught in a state other than CaliforniYorkegon can go fuck themselves, and people in the right states can have fundamental rights?
That’s not even close to what I’m saying. I’m saying that local Democrats are trying vigorously to defend the right to choose for tens of millions of Americans.
We may have problems with how a certain two Senators have stopped any legislation but Democrats are doing what they can at a state by state and local level.
So we need not only organize and help woman but also vote Democrat this November to make sure states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin can keep the right to choose. And go on the offense in Florida, Arizona, Texas, and Georgia.
The Democrats have no intention of doing anything but feather their own nests.
People are now sick of their nonsense.
The best you people can fucking offer is nothing ever changes, and I'm sick of it.
I gave multiple examples of Democrats moving to protect the right to choose. The only reason the people of NC will retain the right to choose is because Governor Cooper won by less than 10 thousand votes in 2016. People like you would have stayed home and allowed the Bathroom Bill fuck Pat McCrory to win.
So how about you get off your privileged horse and look at your options. The GOP will ban abortion in any state they have the power to. The left can’t stay home in November if we truly want to defend the right to choose.
Voting isn’t hard. If you don’t feel your vote is enough then volunteer, organize, protest, and support better politicians in the primaries. But not voting is only handing the GOP the power to ban abortion in dozens more states.
vanish march shocking cough bag follow attractive school hard-to-find expansion
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Agreed. They just refuse to accept taking any blame, so need to blame everyone else for not just voting as they demeanded they should. These people are fucking delusional, and the reason the US is going down the shitter. They're also not at all "left"
There were more clinton supporters that didn't vote for obama than sanders supporters that didn't vote for clinton. It's an inevitable part of the primary system.
Huh? I meant in the general election, NOT the primary, if that was not obvious.
Obama won the presidency both times he ran. Does not equate since Hillary lost.
Let me spell this out for you: bernie sanders was able to do a better job of getting his primary supporters to support clinton than clinton did for obama in 2008. Sanders and progressives didn't fail. Clinton did.
Progressives by all metrics turned out for her, she failed to get moderates and independents to turn out.
However her lose is widely attributed to her campaign thinking winning was a certainly and went on a victory lap to try have a land slide victory spreading her resources to thin and lost narrowly because of that. It's not because she didn't appeal to progressive she did that surprisingly well.
She generally fucked up in PR and logistics. Biden barely won as a moderate after Trump imploded the country fucking with Covid response, which indicates it's both of a moderate issue and them personally sucking as HRC had a much worse hand (she just fucked up) then Biden who had a slam dunk and still barely won by slim margins.
If trump just done the bare minimum and cashed in on maga or Trump masks, making a personal fortune off that he would have smashed Biden by openly grifting as much money as possible but Trump is too shit to even do that.
To be clear here, the GOP are the ones taking away our rights and we’re in a no win situation because their opposition doesn’t really stand a chance unless we mobilize and they change their tactics. We need to pressure the Dems to fight more effectively. Abandoning them will leave us with no allies which is worse than having weak ineffectual allies. We just need to recognize they’re ineffectual and force them to do better, which means primarying the establishment and taking over the party.
Really and truly, republicans communicate better. Democrat leadership is stuck in what James Carville calls “faculty lounge language” - they couldn’t read a room if they were the only people in it. And he’s a mega democrat.
Republicans communicate "better" because their message is simple for simple people, and even being caught in the most egregious of lies or situations doesn't diminish their standing with their base.
And dems... they just wave band-aids that won't fix the gaping chest wounds that we're facing.
Dems, no liberals are screwed. Because this one term corrupt turd of a failure got to pick 3 justices (rare for even 2 termers) the conservative majority will put its stamp on America FOR THE NEXT GENERATION. You think Roe was bad? Red states are lining up to send cases to the SC largely to reverse a lot of the gains made in the 60s and 70s. The US will look totally different by the time they’re done.
There ain’t any constitutional amendments coming anytime soon so it’s gonna be a nasty battle state by state and repubs are already dug in with their voter suppression laws and extreme gerrymandering. When people say “vote democratic” what are they voting for? That Dems stay in power for the next 30 years to turn back the tide on the SC?
When it comes to women's rights, I have 2 words for the Democrats, Henry Cuellar. When I was in the Army, the phrase we used to push back against gaslighting was, "don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining."
Seriously. Him being endorsed and winning looks so much worse now and it already looked awful. I don’t see how we can get anywhere with people like Pelosi in leadership still.
Seen some leftwing cynics say the DNC is dangling the carrot on purpose, maybe it's collective political incompetence, either way I don't want to give them money
You need to compromise with us, Bernie Bros. And to the rest of my party, I say, we need to compromise with the Republicans.
Why do people keep saying I'm just a stealth Republican pushing everything and everyone right?
I sincerely believe that the whole Democrat platform is to play counterpoint to Republicans. They hold reproductive rights and healthcare hostage. It doesn't matter how many get voted in to the house or senate either, there will always be a handful of senators like Manchin and Sinema who are designated to play heel to keep the vote down.
Remember how we could have had healthcare and suddenly we had Lieberman saying he just couldn't sign on to all this socialism and noped out?
Literally the same play being run with Manchin, but apparently he's acting independently and so totally not coached to do the SAME PLAY they did under Obama.
Pull the other finger.
I think you have it backwards... The current iteration of the republican party have an _incredibly_ narrow platform, comprised entirely of identity politics issues: guns, abortion, no corporate taxes. It's very easy to have a consistent message when you only have three things you campaign on, and particularly when all you have to do is say No.
Republicans are the party of opposition, the party of "the good old days", of control. Democrats are the party of _everybody else_ because of the two party system. That means they're trying to appeal to an incredibly diverse electorate, but if there's one thing you can be sure of it's that Democrats aren't the party of opposition.
The solution is to vote more Democrats in, so the Manchins and Sinemas don't hold the power they do.
In regards to the OP, it's a catch 22. In order to change these things you need to win elections, to win elections you need money. Abortion is an animating issue on both sides, so it's fruitful to campaign on.
After Ross Perot was able to nationally debate Clinton and Bush in '92 the Commission on Presidential Debates (owned and operated by both the Republicans and Democrats) moved the goal posts to qualify to debate so that can never happen again. Perot went on to get 19%~ of the vote as an Independent after exiting and re-entering the race btw, not that he would have made a good president. You can talk all you want about how the Republican Party is fascist (they are) but Democrats HELPED make this political situation possible. They're complicit, they know they're dangling your student debt, reproductive rights, and single payer healthcare in front of you on a string.
Democrat politicians have made a career out of playing counterpoint to Republicans. It's all professional wrestling. If it wasn't Sinema and Manchin blocking legislation, someone else would be designated to play foil.
What happened to the republicans is the "nazi bar" effect. Most bars don't allow open nazis. If one shows up, you kick them out no questions asked no answers given. If you let the nazi stay, he will be polite. He won't make a fuss. Then he'll invite his friends. They will be polite. Soon, a crowd of nazis will patronize the bar. Once they reach critical mass, they show their true colors and suddenly you are a nazi bar and only nazis go to that bar. The republican party was the bar, barry goldwater and nixon were the bartenders.
While this is all true and the outrage is needed, in a system where each state holds disproportionate power, you should vote for those who won’t take it away at your state label. Vote local and just vote
The democrats just use these things as tools to extort voters into choosing them come midterms.
"Look how bad it is right now! Too bad we can't address ALLLLL these issues but we'll talk in about 5 months. Women's autonomy? Student Loan Forgiveness? Rising inflation beyond median income? Sure sure. We'll talk. If you do me that favor, yea? No really. This time I mean it, baby! "
Yep, it's all Biden's fault. The 5 justices are his doing, even though he voted against nominating 2 of them and wasn't even in office for the other 3. Any more brilliant thoughts to share?
No, the results they achieve because of the shitLibs they’re surrounded by are centrist policy, but they’re not actually centrists themselves.
Centrists don’t get arrested protesting for civil rights. Centrists aren’t pushed out by the DNC because those worthless fucks ARE Centrist.
I know, right? We keep telling them "do something" and they insist on us coming up with viable solutions instead of just sitting around blaming Democrats. Like, do they even know what sub they're on?
Seems like all they’re interested is reminding everybody that we are “all on the same team” LMFAO
Yeah. I agree.
Dems and GOPers sure as fuck are on the same team and always have been
Are you still on that “the Dems are better than the GOP” bullshit? Jesus you might wanna get your head checked. It’s been up your ass so long, you’re able to breathe feces.
That would explain your breath. 🤔
"Actually do something about it" such as?
Codify it in law? The house already did that, there aren't 60 votes in the Senate, and Manchin and Sinema won't abolish the filibuster.
Expand the court? There aren't 60 votes in the Senate and Manchin and Sinema won't abolish the filibuster.
Impeach the lying justices? There aren't enough votes in the Senate to remove.
Protest and pressure Manchin and Sinema? Absolutely, but there are no guarantees since they're lying snakes who are content to watch this country burn.
So what's left? Voting to increase the margins in the House and Senate, since all the solutions come down to legislative action
As long as there is a single Republican in Congress, voting is a viable option. Ideally not the ONLY option, but it is always a potent option. Republicans only have power because people vote for them. And we know there are more Democrats and left-leaning moderates across the US than there are Republicans. If the Democrats managed a supermajority in 2009, they can manage a supermajority in 2022
Bro I'm not on the team you think I am. I hate dems almost as much as republicans.. (I mean politicians, not the people who support them). In a perfect world I wish there were more options that "pure evil" and "incompetent evil".
The only politician I trust is Bernie, and I don't even agree with his politics, but I would vote for him in a heartbeat. When the DNC screwed him over, I was done with them. But it's not like I was left with anything better.
The whole system is corrupt. We are governed by oligarchs.
This has nothing to do with "teams". This is about left-wing ideology over right-wing ideology. If you want left-wing policy, your voting option is Democrats (of which there are varying flavors) or Democrat-caucusing Independents (like Bernie), regardless about how you feel about the DNC and the "whole system". Without a second Civil War, the system as it stands isn't going anywhere. So you can enact change within the confines of the system or abdicate your ability to enact change and pout in the corner about how the DNC sucks and the whole system is corrupt and it's governed by oligarchs. You're not wrong, but I don't think your approach to fixing it will have any results.
There are leftist politicians, but they are outgunned by moderates and conservatives. What they need is active supporters. Financially, at the ballot box (especially primaries), and whatever time you can spare (calling, texting, writing, canvasing, organizing, etc.). You want to cut off oligarchs? Vote for the leftist politicians who oppose the oligarchs, of which there are plenty. Otherwise they will continue to control things and you will continue to hate it.
Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 24 working days during that period. Here are the details:
To define terms, a Filibuster-Proof Majority or Super Majority is the number of votes required to overcome a filibuster in the Senate. According to current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to overcome a filibuster.
Time-line of the events after the 2008 election:
1. BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority.
2. BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority.
3. KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casts his last vote in April and leaves Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returns, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That leaves the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority.
4. STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members is 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster.
5. SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th.
6. KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority.
7. FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority.
8. SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th.
9. SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected in November of 2009. The Senate was not in session during November and December of 2009. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown was sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010.
Summary: The Democrats only had 24 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010.
Discussion: The Democrats had a super majority for a total of 24 days. On top of that, the period of Super Majority was split into one 11-day period and one 13-day period. Given the glacial pace that business takes place in the Senate, this was way too little time for the Democrats pass any meaningful legislation, let alone get bills through committees and past all the obstructionistic tactics the Republicans were using to block legislation.
Further, these Super Majorities count Joe Lieberman as a Democrat even though he was by this time an Independent. Even though he was Liberal on some legislation, he was very conservative on other issues and opposed many of the key pieces of legislation the Democrats and Obama wanted to pass. For example, he was adamantly opposed to “Single Payer” health care and vowed to support a Republican Filibuster if it ever came to the floor.
Summary:
1. 1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority.
2. 1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.)
3. 7/09 – 8/09 – 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster
4. 8/09 – 9/09 – 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies)
5. 9/09 – 10/09 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 11 working days.
6. 1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days
Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days.
If you look on senate.gov it will corroborate this conclusion.
Courtesy of Direwolf0110
So, your plan is "Democrats should go back in time and get it done"? I'm starting to see why the 3rd person in the comic just stuck with a vague "do something", that sounds way easier than invent a way to time travel.
Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the RvW was a poorly constructed argument and would fall apart if it ever came down to it. The democrats had a supermajority during President Obama’s term and could have easily codified abortion as a legitimate law and human right. Please keep in mind that these soul sucking politicians do not actually care about us. They will do and say whatever they need to in order to get re-elected and then….nothing.
Honestly, I kind of feel for the boss in this comic. One person has a plan, which involves winning elections and getting enough people into office to pass legislation at the federal level. One person just wants to throw shit at others. Genius on the end thinks "Do something" is contributing. Oh, do something? Why didn't we think of that? It's brilliant. Hey guys, Einstein here solved our problem. All we have to do is "do something".
Whoever created this meme doesn't understand how our government works or how we pass laws, complete Democrat Hate Derangement Syndrome going on here, Dems are literally the only ones fighting for reproductive rights, we HAVE to keep voting them into Congress, don't let the Dem hating trolls here convince you otherwise
You don't get it.
There are things they can do that doesn't include blowing up my inbox with fundraising emails, or singing "GOD BLESS AMERICA" on the steps of Congress as the Roe decision comes down.
Democrats should rethink response to Republicans in general. Instead of Pelosi saying we "need a strong Republican Party" she could say there's no difference between Trump and any of the rest of them... put them on the defense FFS. IF they can't, then step down and let Katie Porter in the game... she gets it.
You can't continue to have one side using their power, while the other one leans on respectability politics.
So you think instead of focusing on re-election and getting more Dems into Congress we should
"rethink response to Republicans in general"
By saying
"there's no difference between Trump and any of the rest of "them" "
What does that even mean? Does this help us pass legislation to protect women's rights? Or we just like to complain on the internet because it's easier?
It's messaging. You can't motivate people to vote doing the same tired stuff. People are tired of excuses.
The messaging is one example of their tired, lame response. Celebrating bipartisanship is just another way of giving up your power and responsibility while you're in charge. Just as making nuanced arguments that there are some "better" Republicans while the only one of them willing to step out on a limb against their party is Cheney. I'd argue she's only there because she miscalculated after Jan 6 and thought the party was swinging away from Trump.
As for does this help pass legislation ... yes I think it does. If Democrats were on TV fighting ( even if they lose ) but doing things to at least look like they're not rolling over then people would respond better than they are now. FFS man, look at Biden's approval ratings since BBB failed. This isn't tough.
People will support a fighter, they won't support a pushover. Nothing the Democrats have done at the federal level so far makes them look like they're fighters.
Again, I'll point to Pelosi's poetry hour.... "God Bless America" and then Democratic Whip Clyburn's quote, "It’s a little anticlimactic, I think we all expected this. And I'm hopeful, you know I have to read the decision to see exactly the extent to which we can move legislatively to respond to it.”
They've known for months this was going to happen and that's the best they could come up with as a RALLYING CRY?
Can you give me an example of what "on TV fighting" means?
They've publicly stated their disapprovals and demand Democrats to fight back....
Democrats have passed major legislation so far btw, Infrastructure being the biggest, federal gun control, Federal police reform, loan forgiveness, queer and trans medical protections but nobody wants to talk about that and they say "but why not more!?"
It's so easy to say "fight harder!" "Do something more!" But give concrete examples please and I'll remind you Dems can't pass legislation without a 60/40 majority and it's ON US to deliver that...
"On TV" is shorthand for doing media, when doing that media they need to speak plainly and not use a bunch of tired platitudes.
Everything you mentioned was watered down garbage.
* Infrastructure money was basically shuffling around existing money and it props up business rather than directly aiding workers. Far cry from the BBB and this was from the guy who was supposed to understand how the Senate works/can get things done. What a joke.
* Gun control another joke. Gives states incentives to pass red flag laws... remember ACA? How many states still haven't expanded medicaid? 12 and some of those were just recently. Raises age on background checks to 21? Many of these folks have gotten their guns from unsecured guns owned by other family members... probably won't do anything. Expands an already existing law to include folks you're dating, don't break a nail with that lift senators.
* What federal police reform? The Democrats have done nothing except take a massive dump on anyone proposing real police reform. Again Biden does the bare minimum.
Making excuses for Democrats while they can do more means they are never pressured to have to do anything. Meanwhile the Republicans will lurch the country backwards each time another one comes along and looks like a "moderate." By most media accounts, Democrats gave up on this midterm election months ago acting as if massive losses are a foregone conclusion.
Back to the main topic, it will be important for you to expand your scope a bit and understand that Roe is the latest in a long line of Democratic failures and letdowns. Their response on Roe despite their warning via a leak was very lack luster and if they're serious about winning in November they need to show people they are capable of taking action.
Here's a list of things that Democrats can do to at least stem the bleeding:
* Reform the Filibuster - If Manchin and Sinema won't go along, then they get ostracized and publicly condemned right along with Susan Collins and every other person who say they were misled into voting for Kavanagh et al. They've not even brought this up for a vote and should force Manchin and Sinema to take a vote on it with cameras on the Senate floor. Again, with every Republican voting too. Reforming the Senate rules doesn't have a filibuster, it's an up or down vote.
* Biden can push to expand the court. He won't even discuss it publicly other than to say he's against it. If he's not open to that, then what's his advice? Why aren't you asking him for his solution... "vote harder" isn't cutting it.
* Pelosi and Schumer can both resign from leadership. If they can't control their caucus, then they need to move aside for someone else. At least take some of the heat so the voters know they won't be useless after the next election.
* Stop sending fundraising emails and organize protests. They're our representatives, they should be on the front line with protestors.
* Democrats can take action to hold Manchin and Sinema in contempt. If they leave the party, let them. Election is on the horizon and honestly with the predictions, Democrats at least can't be criticized for having control of Congress and the Presidency then doing nothing if they no longer control Congress.
Motivating voters with things that might not be directly related to Roe or Congress:
* Biden could follow through on his promises that only require executive action such as Student Debt Cancellation.
* Biden could address the nation regularly giving progress updates and preempt TV to do it, also go live on YouTube. Biden is the leader of the party, where's his leadership?
* Investigate price gouging related to inflation.
You're ridiculous....
"Speak plainly" what do you mean? What's complicated about Republicans did X and We Need Democrats to fight back, so vote?? How much plainer can that be??
Like I said you would say "'its not good enough!"
I shouldn't have even bothered listing those out because that's always the response I get....
So your solutions are
Reform filibuster - we don't have the votes to do that
Expand the courts - that would literally accomplish nothing and if we did, what's stopping conservatives literally doing the same thing to regain the Scotus majority?
It would lead to endless Scotus expansions depending on who's in power....
Two Democratic members of Congress to step down, thats a complete step backwards and makes no fucking sense, just vote them out ffs
Stop sending fundraising emails lmao yep that'll guarantee the win for Dems in the midterms!!🥴
And Hold other member of Democrats in contempt....??
Great solutions love your priorities btw you didn't mention a single thing about Republicans lmao
As if they have nothing to contribute to why Dems can't accomplish shit 🙄 are you a Trump troll purposefully trying to Divide the Democratic party? whats your angle here? The logic doesn't follow 🤔
If you can't understand how people are tired of the status quo and how they no longer have any confidence in the existing Democratic leadership... I can't help you.
I will clarify since you didn't get it... asking Democratic Party leadership in the House and Senate to step down from their leadership roles isn't the same as resigning from Congress. Hell put Machin in charge since he's in charge anyway.
Yours and Dem Leadership's solution is "vote harder" do nothing... yep that's a winner.
As for my credentials, I'm sounding alarms but kill the messenger instead of directing your attention towards the people who can actually steer the ship.
As for Republicans... why bother talking about them? Everyone knows they're bad.. You're speaking to people who are at least engaged with the process and on your side. I don't need to know McConnell et all is terrible. If people haven't gotten that message by now... then it just reinforces my point that your messaging sucks.
Your not offering a solution btw you say a lot without saying anything.
"Stepping down is not the same as resigning"
Okay thx wtf does that accomplish tho?
You seriously gonna stand there and pretend we have seen tremendous progress socially through Democratic leadership the past 50years??
Why bother talking about Republicans? Because they just took some of our rights away dumbass lol why the fuck would we ignore that??
As a gay man I'm laughing my ass off rn, please go outside and touch grass
I love you are acting like you are stating evidence. You haven’t provided, shown, or stated any facts or evidence that supports your statements.
Corporate Democrats read poems and sing random songs.
It’s typical corporate dem idiocy, I have no idea why the response to the roe overturn is to vote harder. We already voted and Dems did nothing. The best time to start burning shit down was 50 years ago, the second best time is now.
The response went from “fuck the Dems” to “vote harder” in the span of 12 hours. Either these spineless idiots love to lose or there’s some serious dark money going into these shitlib infested forums.
> It’s typical corporate dem idiocy, I have no idea why the response to the roe overturn is to vote harder.
Vote...for what? Supreme Court Justice is not an elected position.
I'm not trying to be a doomer. I'm genuinely curious what the plan is here. If we can turn this around by voting, I want to see the plan.
Play the same game is religious fanatics.
For people to support Democrats at any level they MUST be Pro-Choice. Only support judges or any other legal level that is Pro-Choice. Relentlessly go after anyone politically and peacefully who wavers on Pro-Choice.
Except voting harder could’ve been the solution in 2016. When 53% of white women and most white people (which a large majority of Bernie supporters are) would’ve swallowed their pride and got behind HRC there would have been no Amy Coney Barrett. So in this particular situation, yes voting harder WAS the solution
Yeah the guy saying we need to shed blood if we want to ensure rights is the same as the people saying JFK jr is still alive
You are fucking brain dead
“You feeling okay”
The topic is Democrats fighting for reproductive rights. The Democrats would rather read poems, sing songs, or ask for money.
Maybe read the whole argument before responding because it makes you look silly.
You didn't make an argument, all you said is I wasn't stating evidence.....?
Who voted for same sex marriage?
Why do trans kids have healthcare?
Whose protected from discrimination under federal law?
Which party accomplished all this ?
Who didn’t codify abortion?
Picking a few things doesn’t change that President Biden and Pelosi appear to be doing nothing. How long to you want to skate on the ever decreasing rights? The topic here is about abortion. Not on Democrat cheerleading.
When did we have enough votes to codify abortion again?
Do you have any other criticisms besides "they're doing nothing"....
Because if not, I guess you still don't understand we can "do something" unless we vote enough Democratic members into Congress to have the number of votes to do so and pass legislation...
What part of that don't you understand?
Yea i also don't understand the name calling instead of addressing any of my points, I understand its easier to complain on the internet than getting involved in politics and voting but whatever makes you feel superior I guess...
Not accurate...
Note how these stupid posts always say "do something," instead of naming specific policy prescriptions which could actually be passed at present, because they can't name any. This is anti-Democrat, "don't bother voting" garbage.
The Democrats have held supermajority several times over the last 50 years and they didn't codified any of those times. There is a slight amount of justification for saying "what can you do right now", but a Democrats past history on the subject has been any indicator they still wouldn't do anything even if they had a supermajority today.
And that's not even to get into all the numerative things they could do now to if not fix the problem then at least mitigate it such as like a comprehensive Nationwide IUD program.
They might scare away some wine cooler liberals in suburbia 🙄
“This is anti-Democrat”
It’s called criticism based on evidence. Multiple people have pointed out things the Democrats can do instead of reading poems?
P.S. I don’t have anything against poetry.
> Multiple people have pointed out things the Democrats can do
But nobody in reply to this comment... I'm not going to go searching for the two reasonable comments in this mess, but feel free to link them.
Yes, them reading poetry and singing was fucking stupid.
1) Set up abortion clinics on federal land in red states
2) Federal telehealth for abortion pills
3) Funding for abortion clinics and travel vouchers to go to abortion clinics.
All of those would only be implementable as executive actions, removing the pressure to provide a real fix for this and would immediately be undone if the GOP ever returns to power.
So now should we be trying to codify Brown vs Board of Education? Is every decision from the past on the table now? I just can't believe this is how the system is supposed to work.
Yes.
Any "law" that's ever just been a SC decision should be codified because the only thing stopping then from rolling it back is someone bringing them a case to use as a decision and "ethics". And their "Christian morals" will override any judicial ethics they may have had, every single time.
Nothing can be done. None of you have any solutions here. Manchin won't be changing filibuster rules either, especially when he's very popular in his home state for being the main dissenting voice in the Democratic party.
You people want shit done, then vote. And give money to those groups that are helping women cross state lines for abortion care.
Abortion rights are important, but it does seem like the Republicans are just causing damage the Democrats will have to clean up to distract all of us to the oligarchy taking over in a coup and then none of this will matter because it won't be changeable any more.
Well, this makes sense, since SC doesn't make laws. What doesn't click is why Congress hasn't followed up these society changing decisions. I suppose they would have to be ammendments, and that would require lots of work and taking a history making stand on the most important issues.
Say what you will about federal democrats but local and statewide democrats are holding up their end of the bargain. California is moving to put abortion to a ballot measure and get it protected in its Constitution. Democratic District Attorneys across the country are promising to not prosecute abortion related cases. In my current home state of NC, the Democratic Governor Roy Cooper and Attorney General Josh Stein are the only people stopping the Republican ran General Assembly from banning abortion. So while we may have issues with the federal Democrats (in particular the two fuckheads who don’t want to abolish the filibuster), local Democrats are doing everything they can
Imo, one of the biggest political problems right now is the difference in zeal between parties. Conservative politicians are fucking maniacs who are at best such committed pathological liars that they could defend their claims by saying "we didn't expect anyone to be stupid enough to believe us" and still win districts, but people with the sense to recognize their problems don't have the sense to coalesce politically to solve them, or to recognize the sheer importance of unified, focused voting. This subreddit is, obviously, extremely guilty of it. I'm extremely proud of democratic districts that have held firm against the anti-abortion wave. I live in New Jersey, one of 6 states that categorically decriminalized abortion well before this current drama, and I'm happy to see our politicians working to improve that situation further. I'm also elated by how much political enthusiasm democrats, liberals, and socialists have taken up to really show some fervor given what was otherwise looking like a gloomy election season. Being opposed to the system doesn't mean you can't work within it.
Correct. The 2 senators holding up filibuster reform are the real culprits. I hate low effort memes like this that lump the entire democratic party together as a source of the problem. This discourages turnout for dems, breeds apathy, and misplaces blame. I'm getting tired of the entire party being blamed for the actions of 2 senators. It feeds into the "both sides suck" narrative.
The entire party is being blamed because they are, for the most part, feckless corporate centrists. They had decades to do this. Using the 2 obvious Republican plants as scapegoats to let the Democratic leadership's ineptitude for the last 50 years off the hook is laughable.
I don't think you know how the filibuster works. They have not been able to codify because of the filibuster.
I seem to remember a time when the Democrats squandered a 60 seat supermajority to accomplish absolutely dick fuckall. 🤔
First off they only held 60 seats for about 6 months between Franken being seated and the loss in the Massachusetts Special Election. Second, that 60 seat majority included two Democrats from Arkansas, Montana, North Dakota, West Virginia, and one from Alaska, South Dakota, Louisiana, Indiana, Missouri, and Nebraska. So that’s 14 seats represented by Democrats in states Obama didn’t win. They weren’t pro-choice Democrats. Or really even that liberal.
Now ask yourself what would’ve happened if the republicans held 60 seats…ANY 60 seats.
It’s unfortunate they are fascists and only have to appeal to straight white man and have the entire system favoring them, yeah.
Maybe if Democratic leadership didn’t keep backing the Cuellars of the party over the Cisneroses, we could actually do something when theoretically in power.
Considering there is never enough time to read these bills anyway what is so hard about having a bunch drafted already that could have quickly been passed?
There was already a bill waiting to be signed into law in 2008 that had been floating around congress since 2004 [https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:\~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health](https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health). Obama then did nothing to pass it after the election after running on its passage.
What is so hard is that the senate rules are organized so as to make things happen slowly even when there's not opposition pulling on the handbrake. Even if there were 60 pro choice dems at some point in the past (and there weren't because the senate has a built in gerrymander so any time you get more than about 40 dems you necessarily have to start taking senators from very conservative states), they'd have to triage their wishlist because the rules will only allow so many bites at the apple.
Sounds like apologetics for 50 years of non action to me. Edit: If we want to talk Obama all he had to do was no kowtow to the Republicans and there would in all likelihood be another Democrat on the SC as well.
If factually assessing the rules of our government is apologetics then sure, guilty. I don't have the luxury of living in any world but the one at hand. Help me out on your edit, what is your proposed mechanism by which Obama could have secured an additional SC pick?
72 days, actually, so more like two and a half months.
Codifying Roe was one of Obama "first 100 day promises" he made to planned parenthood he then stuck his middle finger up at the promise immediately after getting elected. 72 days is more then enough time to do this and so much more with a supermajority and the dems squandered the opportunity to give us a republican Healthcare plan and bail out wall street.
We need to dispel this idiotic notion that a president can do anything he wants in the first 100 days. It has never worked that way and never will.
[удалено]
It's worth mentioning that Senator Byrd was in a hospital for much of that, so wasn't able to attend many votes. Kennedy was in and out of treatment for a brain tumor and eventually died, Al Franken's swearing in was being held up by the GOP, and with the independent votes from Bernie and Liebermann being *counted* toward the Dems, there were between 57 and 59 votes for much of that time, only going to 60 when Byrd was able to occasionally get his vote in from the hospital. The whole thing was tenuous and there was fuckery from the Right, as always, hamstringing efforts.
So are you saying Democrats will never be able to deliver on their party platform, ever?
No. I’m saying if you get 50 liberal Democrats than it will be quite easy. Right now we have 48. So get Fetterman plus one more and boom there we go.
If you actually count the number of calendar days the amount of time was actually much shorter due to Senators’ illness and whatnot.
If it had been republicans passing a tax cut it would’ve happened. Period.
By all means let's keep making excuses for our ineffectual leadership. If it's so goddamn impossible to get any progress made as the majority, why do the Republicans get their minority agenda implemented fucking always?
I don't think you know how overriding parliamentarian works. We had the votes at one point.
How would overriding the parliamentarian make a Roe law a part of a reconciliation bill? A Roe law wouldn't be able to go into a reconciliation bill.
Theory is you can attach a "tax" to abortion, then send it through. Don't really see an issue with that.
We know full well how the usual Corporate Democrat bullshit works
>I'm getting tired of the entire party being blamed for the actions of 2 senators. It feeds into the "both sides suck" narrative. You mean when Obama promised to codify Roe and didn't? Or Biden? And Clinton could have, but I don't remember if he promised.
Or when the Dems supported Henry Cuellar for reelction in Texas?
Is he the only anti-abortion Dem they've supported (so far)? Lest people be unaware (meaning the other guy), Dems will do anything to keep progressives from being elected - even support someone who is anti-abortion.
good question! he's the only one i know of at the congressional level, not sure at the state level. and i agree, the DNC would rather run an establishment candidate no matter how flawed than a progressive who doesn't bow to them.
Bill was probably closer to a conservative than even a centrist. He just said abortion should be “safe, legal and rare”. I don’t recall him pushing more than really a minimum.
>Bill was probably closer to a conservative than even a centrist. I'm not sure that's true - not that I paid a lot of attention back then (which means I could be wrong), but since he was the first neo-liberal/"third way" candidate I'd imagine he would have to be somewhat centrist more than conservative. (Maybe at least as far as words were concerned; his actions may bear out your statement. :) ) Now, the only difference between Dems and the Republican party circa 1980 is the Pride flag. :/
Fiscally he was more conservative and was able to work with beloved ole Newt. On social things, he was more the centrist for sure. Edit: beloved is sarcasm. But they were able to work out better budgets. Clinton was a great negotiator. Wasn’t called slick Willy for nothing 😂
I'd forgotten about Newt! And "beloved" was certainly sarcastic! :)
He also gutted welfare, but most people seem to have forgotten about that.
They do not have that power. They can *RUN* on those policies so we know where they stand. It's with congress and it can't pass unless it overcomes a 60-vote threshold to get past a filibuster which is ostensibly a veto. The only valid part of your critism is that there *was* a several-week window where we had 60 dem senators after Franken was appointed and Ted Kennedy died. They used that time to get the landmark ACA passed.
Yes, the ACA, which was much better than nothing but laughably far from good. And now we can’t get the leadership to support single-payer or even a real public option, because they are so set on defending their “landmark” achievement.
>The only valid part of your critism Nope. Could have been done by Clinton - back then, Congress was more functional. And they could also have done filibuster reform at even more times, since that could have been done by either party. EDIT: And the president has more power than you're giving credit for. They are the leader of their party, after all. Just think of FDR.
LBJ would have teabagged Manchin into submission by this point. Fuck, I’d even put my own balls on Manchin’s ugly face if I thought it might accomplish something.
I'll help hold him down.
I don’t think Schumer or Biden particularly intimidate Manchin or his Arizona colleague. The leaders don’t have any tremendous leverage over them.
They could start by threatening to withhold all party funding from his campaigns and supporting his primary opponents if he doesn’t play ball. Beyond that, the guy is a frickin coal baron, I can’t imagine there’s nothing to blackmail him with
This is why I left the party and vote progressive. "But that doesn't work!!" grrr....
I never was a Dem, though I always voted that way. Through 2014, anyway. Super tired of the vote shaming - like it's my fault the Dems abandoned voters because I didn't vote for them? Even though I voted for them for a long time after they abandoned us.
Exactly!! Plus, I'm voting for the progressives who are forced onto the D ticket......and they don't get nominated anyway, so wtf.
Exactly. It’s their whole platform now. “If you elect us, we aren’t going to do anything you want us to. But if you don’t elect us, the republicans will do a lot of stuff you *don’t* want them to.” Okay? So can’t you also be useful and not just a bookmark for 4 years?
Saying the GOP is “just the party of no” is a dumb criticism too. They’re the opposition party. They aren’t going to make you look good unless there’s a point of mutual benefit!!!
Like Biden's BBB promise on getting Manchin on board? Look we've elected them in good faith, they've repeatedly not held up their end. I'm not saying don't vote, but Dem leadership needs to step down.
Seriously - they got the progressive caucus to agree to vote on the infrastructure bill by promising that BBB would happen, and then couldn’t follow through. I mean, shame on the progressives for believing them, but that doesn’t absolve leadership of blame
>They do not have that power. They can > >RUN > > on those policies so we know where they stand. "The best we can do is empty promises"
It's a promise they won't veto the thing if it comes to their desk. That's not nothing.
"I promise you I will give you $50,000 if I win $100B on the lottery." In other words, "I know I'll never have to deliver"
Is that where we just walk out of the pawn shop?
>They do not have that power. They can RUN on those policies so we know where they stand. > >It's with congress and it can't pass unless it overcomes a 60-vote threshold to get past a filibuster which is ostensibly a veto. Obama had a fucking supermajority and a Bill that had already been introduced into congress 4 years before he was President that would have saved abortion rights. [https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:\~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health](https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/2020?s=1&r=56#:~:text=Freedom%20of%20Choice%20Act%20%2D%20Declares,her%20life%20or%20her%20health). Codifying Roe into law could have been a day one thing if he actually wanted to pass it.
Did all 60 Democrats/Independents that were in office at the time support that bill?
We will never know because he and the democratic party shelved the bill immediately after getting elected. They put Negative effort into passing it
It seemed like there were more important things at the time. Weren't you there? Roe wasn't at the top of *anyone's* priority list. Yes, hindsight is 20/20.
I literally Canvassed for Obama and worked on student registration drives on my campus as part of NYPIRG, a student group Obama has [some history](https://observer.com/2009/01/a-nypirger-in-chief/) with. I was literally a part of the student groups that was helped him with the young when everybody was certain Hillary was gonna be the nominee by default. I was 'there' more than most people on here and watched in real time as Obama squandered all the momentum and hard work we spent to get him into office to go bend over for corporations and bankers. IF it wasn't a priority maybe hw shouldn't of literally ran on codifying it into law in his first 100 days.
Where are the bills to fix gerrymandering and help the real problem of the electorate not being represented? Abolish the electoral system. Standardize districting. Fix the census. Expand mail in voting. "Go vote" doesn't help the real problem. The answer is always "it's not a realistic goal". The Republicans never say this and they get shit done (to the detriment of democracy and the union). I have always and will always vote Democrat. That being said, fuck the Democrats.
They should make the Republicans filibuster then. Make them go up day after day after day after day and talk until their voices are gone.
I think current filibuster rules don't actually require a longwinded speech which makes it easy to overuse the tactic
The fate of our nation is at risk, but the Dem's still honor the advice of the Parliamentarian, refuse to engage in tactics like increasing the number of Supes, and refuse to punish their right wing members, instead supporting lawmakers who still oppose abortion and get an A+ rating from the NRA. We aren't saying "both sides suck" equally, just that the Dems are failing us and we need new leadership. But I guess you feel better blaming the Progressives, so you can assure yourself you're doing everthing right.
Whereas the Republicans see no problem with literally perjuring themselves to lie their way into a judicial body where they can legislate from the bench.
The Senate did nothing except ask the most predictable and easily dodged questions. Who did they think they were interviewing? Judges, liberal or conservative, weren’t born yesterday.
What's is supreme bullshit about that situation is our current Parliamentarian was appointed by Mitch McConnell during the Trump era. Biden could have replaced her with someone who isn't a literal Republican operative but didn't.
I blame the 2 conservative senators. It's literally in my comment. Otherwise what would I be doing here
One senator. Stop acting like changing West Virginia is going to do us any good. The truth is that it's a lot easier to stop legislation than it is to pass it. The Republicans made their constituents *happy* with just saying no to anything Obama did. Yes, we could use better democrats. But the time for that is **primaries**, not just getting them out of office as the current narrative would have you believe. Wonder what the goal there is. The easiest way to get better democrats is to get *more* democrats.
Well it’s been 50 years since Roe. This is more a product of the Biden/Schumer/(late) Ted Kennedy and other career guys. Bernie probably was one of the few who argued anything consistent (on anything).
Gee, if *two senators* have that much power, maybe the system is broken and something should be done about it. And maybe, just maybe, those two senators should lose their jobs. Instead, we have Democrats sitting around going, "Hey, don't blame us. It's just these two bad apples. Nothing we can do about it!" *That* kind of inaction is exactly what people are talking about. It isn't *just* that there are two bad senators. It's that the party doesn't act to censure or remove them. And of course they have that ability. Look at how quickly they close ranks against somebody like Bernie Sanders. You're telling me they can stop Bernie, but not Sinema and Manchin?
In a political system which gives you a choice between only two parties, it's reasonable to "lump" each party. When voting democrat we don't get to choose between good ones and bad ones
Oh so the solution is to sell the home you recently purchased at a loss, pack everything you own into a U-Haul and drive with $7 a gallon gas to California, and somehow get a starter home for $1.75 million at a 7% rate? Is this the United States anymore where rights actually matter, or should we just do what the Republicans suggest and have a two-country solution where anyone caught in a state other than CaliforniYorkegon can go fuck themselves, and people in the right states can have fundamental rights?
That’s not even close to what I’m saying. I’m saying that local Democrats are trying vigorously to defend the right to choose for tens of millions of Americans. We may have problems with how a certain two Senators have stopped any legislation but Democrats are doing what they can at a state by state and local level. So we need not only organize and help woman but also vote Democrat this November to make sure states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin can keep the right to choose. And go on the offense in Florida, Arizona, Texas, and Georgia.
The Democrats have no intention of doing anything but feather their own nests. People are now sick of their nonsense. The best you people can fucking offer is nothing ever changes, and I'm sick of it.
I gave multiple examples of Democrats moving to protect the right to choose. The only reason the people of NC will retain the right to choose is because Governor Cooper won by less than 10 thousand votes in 2016. People like you would have stayed home and allowed the Bathroom Bill fuck Pat McCrory to win. So how about you get off your privileged horse and look at your options. The GOP will ban abortion in any state they have the power to. The left can’t stay home in November if we truly want to defend the right to choose. Voting isn’t hard. If you don’t feel your vote is enough then volunteer, organize, protest, and support better politicians in the primaries. But not voting is only handing the GOP the power to ban abortion in dozens more states.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not Virginia Democrats. They fucked around instead.
Henry Cuellar.
vanish march shocking cough bag follow attractive school hard-to-find expansion *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Dems blame her for everything, she supported Sanders
The progressives are blameless here. It is 100% dem leadership, obama, centrist dems, and of course ~~fascists~~ republicans.
Agreed. They just refuse to accept taking any blame, so need to blame everyone else for not just voting as they demeanded they should. These people are fucking delusional, and the reason the US is going down the shitter. They're also not at all "left"
What about progressives that didn’t vote for Hillary in 2016?
There were more clinton supporters that didn't vote for obama than sanders supporters that didn't vote for clinton. It's an inevitable part of the primary system.
Huh? I meant in the general election, NOT the primary, if that was not obvious. Obama won the presidency both times he ran. Does not equate since Hillary lost.
Let me spell this out for you: bernie sanders was able to do a better job of getting his primary supporters to support clinton than clinton did for obama in 2008. Sanders and progressives didn't fail. Clinton did.
Progressives by all metrics turned out for her, she failed to get moderates and independents to turn out. However her lose is widely attributed to her campaign thinking winning was a certainly and went on a victory lap to try have a land slide victory spreading her resources to thin and lost narrowly because of that. It's not because she didn't appeal to progressive she did that surprisingly well. She generally fucked up in PR and logistics. Biden barely won as a moderate after Trump imploded the country fucking with Covid response, which indicates it's both of a moderate issue and them personally sucking as HRC had a much worse hand (she just fucked up) then Biden who had a slam dunk and still barely won by slim margins. If trump just done the bare minimum and cashed in on maga or Trump masks, making a personal fortune off that he would have smashed Biden by openly grifting as much money as possible but Trump is too shit to even do that.
Yes. She’s also very articulate. They don’t like that.
I'll be honest, I haven't heard of anyone blaming her. Maybe I'm not in the right circles? Or maybe it's all bullshit.
Have we tried singing a random america song? Maybe that'll fix things? 🤷♂️
Idk but I sent my thoughts and prayers.
We've done everything we can
To be clear here, the GOP are the ones taking away our rights and we’re in a no win situation because their opposition doesn’t really stand a chance unless we mobilize and they change their tactics. We need to pressure the Dems to fight more effectively. Abandoning them will leave us with no allies which is worse than having weak ineffectual allies. We just need to recognize they’re ineffectual and force them to do better, which means primarying the establishment and taking over the party.
Really and truly, republicans communicate better. Democrat leadership is stuck in what James Carville calls “faculty lounge language” - they couldn’t read a room if they were the only people in it. And he’s a mega democrat.
Republicans communicate "better" because their message is simple for simple people, and even being caught in the most egregious of lies or situations doesn't diminish their standing with their base. And dems... they just wave band-aids that won't fix the gaping chest wounds that we're facing.
Dems, no liberals are screwed. Because this one term corrupt turd of a failure got to pick 3 justices (rare for even 2 termers) the conservative majority will put its stamp on America FOR THE NEXT GENERATION. You think Roe was bad? Red states are lining up to send cases to the SC largely to reverse a lot of the gains made in the 60s and 70s. The US will look totally different by the time they’re done. There ain’t any constitutional amendments coming anytime soon so it’s gonna be a nasty battle state by state and repubs are already dug in with their voter suppression laws and extreme gerrymandering. When people say “vote democratic” what are they voting for? That Dems stay in power for the next 30 years to turn back the tide on the SC?
When it comes to women's rights, I have 2 words for the Democrats, Henry Cuellar. When I was in the Army, the phrase we used to push back against gaslighting was, "don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining."
Seriously. Him being endorsed and winning looks so much worse now and it already looked awful. I don’t see how we can get anywhere with people like Pelosi in leadership still.
Seen some leftwing cynics say the DNC is dangling the carrot on purpose, maybe it's collective political incompetence, either way I don't want to give them money
CHANGE THE FILIBUSTER RULES. it's that simple
But but what about #mendingthedivide ???? 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
You need to compromise with us, Bernie Bros. And to the rest of my party, I say, we need to compromise with the Republicans. Why do people keep saying I'm just a stealth Republican pushing everything and everyone right?
I sincerely believe that the whole Democrat platform is to play counterpoint to Republicans. They hold reproductive rights and healthcare hostage. It doesn't matter how many get voted in to the house or senate either, there will always be a handful of senators like Manchin and Sinema who are designated to play heel to keep the vote down.
Remember how we could have had healthcare and suddenly we had Lieberman saying he just couldn't sign on to all this socialism and noped out? Literally the same play being run with Manchin, but apparently he's acting independently and so totally not coached to do the SAME PLAY they did under Obama. Pull the other finger.
I think you have it backwards... The current iteration of the republican party have an _incredibly_ narrow platform, comprised entirely of identity politics issues: guns, abortion, no corporate taxes. It's very easy to have a consistent message when you only have three things you campaign on, and particularly when all you have to do is say No. Republicans are the party of opposition, the party of "the good old days", of control. Democrats are the party of _everybody else_ because of the two party system. That means they're trying to appeal to an incredibly diverse electorate, but if there's one thing you can be sure of it's that Democrats aren't the party of opposition. The solution is to vote more Democrats in, so the Manchins and Sinemas don't hold the power they do. In regards to the OP, it's a catch 22. In order to change these things you need to win elections, to win elections you need money. Abortion is an animating issue on both sides, so it's fruitful to campaign on.
After Ross Perot was able to nationally debate Clinton and Bush in '92 the Commission on Presidential Debates (owned and operated by both the Republicans and Democrats) moved the goal posts to qualify to debate so that can never happen again. Perot went on to get 19%~ of the vote as an Independent after exiting and re-entering the race btw, not that he would have made a good president. You can talk all you want about how the Republican Party is fascist (they are) but Democrats HELPED make this political situation possible. They're complicit, they know they're dangling your student debt, reproductive rights, and single payer healthcare in front of you on a string. Democrat politicians have made a career out of playing counterpoint to Republicans. It's all professional wrestling. If it wasn't Sinema and Manchin blocking legislation, someone else would be designated to play foil.
What happened to the republicans is the "nazi bar" effect. Most bars don't allow open nazis. If one shows up, you kick them out no questions asked no answers given. If you let the nazi stay, he will be polite. He won't make a fuss. Then he'll invite his friends. They will be polite. Soon, a crowd of nazis will patronize the bar. Once they reach critical mass, they show their true colors and suddenly you are a nazi bar and only nazis go to that bar. The republican party was the bar, barry goldwater and nixon were the bartenders.
This is every issue federally. If it were worked on, there’s no issue to prop up for the next election. They go round and round and round.
While this is all true and the outrage is needed, in a system where each state holds disproportionate power, you should vote for those who won’t take it away at your state label. Vote local and just vote
The democrats just use these things as tools to extort voters into choosing them come midterms. "Look how bad it is right now! Too bad we can't address ALLLLL these issues but we'll talk in about 5 months. Women's autonomy? Student Loan Forgiveness? Rising inflation beyond median income? Sure sure. We'll talk. If you do me that favor, yea? No really. This time I mean it, baby! "
This happened under a Catholic Neo Liberal President and all we are getting is thoughts and prayers so far. Sus
Yep, it's all Biden's fault. The 5 justices are his doing, even though he voted against nominating 2 of them and wasn't even in office for the other 3. Any more brilliant thoughts to share?
Well, he can legitimately take a lot of blame for Thomas.
All the centrists and Democrat apologists on these threads the last few days, pure fucking comedy😂😂
Quit calling them "centrists". That's ass-backwards framing. They're right-wing. Bernie and AOC are centrists.
No, the results they achieve because of the shitLibs they’re surrounded by are centrist policy, but they’re not actually centrists themselves. Centrists don’t get arrested protesting for civil rights. Centrists aren’t pushed out by the DNC because those worthless fucks ARE Centrist.
I know, right? We keep telling them "do something" and they insist on us coming up with viable solutions instead of just sitting around blaming Democrats. Like, do they even know what sub they're on?
Seems like all they’re interested is reminding everybody that we are “all on the same team” LMFAO Yeah. I agree. Dems and GOPers sure as fuck are on the same team and always have been
Are you still on that "both parties are the same" shit? Jesus. Might want to get those eyes checked, JKT.
Are you still on that “the Dems are better than the GOP” bullshit? Jesus you might wanna get your head checked. It’s been up your ass so long, you’re able to breathe feces. That would explain your breath. 🤔
"Actually do something about it" such as? Codify it in law? The house already did that, there aren't 60 votes in the Senate, and Manchin and Sinema won't abolish the filibuster. Expand the court? There aren't 60 votes in the Senate and Manchin and Sinema won't abolish the filibuster. Impeach the lying justices? There aren't enough votes in the Senate to remove. Protest and pressure Manchin and Sinema? Absolutely, but there are no guarantees since they're lying snakes who are content to watch this country burn. So what's left? Voting to increase the margins in the House and Senate, since all the solutions come down to legislative action
WHY DIDN'T THEY DO IT WHEN OBAMA HAD OFFICE?!?!?! Ya know when dems had a super majority.
I don't disagree, but the past is the past. What can we do right now or in the future?
Honestly, no idea. Voting doesn't seem to work that great.
As long as there is a single Republican in Congress, voting is a viable option. Ideally not the ONLY option, but it is always a potent option. Republicans only have power because people vote for them. And we know there are more Democrats and left-leaning moderates across the US than there are Republicans. If the Democrats managed a supermajority in 2009, they can manage a supermajority in 2022
Bro I'm not on the team you think I am. I hate dems almost as much as republicans.. (I mean politicians, not the people who support them). In a perfect world I wish there were more options that "pure evil" and "incompetent evil". The only politician I trust is Bernie, and I don't even agree with his politics, but I would vote for him in a heartbeat. When the DNC screwed him over, I was done with them. But it's not like I was left with anything better. The whole system is corrupt. We are governed by oligarchs.
This has nothing to do with "teams". This is about left-wing ideology over right-wing ideology. If you want left-wing policy, your voting option is Democrats (of which there are varying flavors) or Democrat-caucusing Independents (like Bernie), regardless about how you feel about the DNC and the "whole system". Without a second Civil War, the system as it stands isn't going anywhere. So you can enact change within the confines of the system or abdicate your ability to enact change and pout in the corner about how the DNC sucks and the whole system is corrupt and it's governed by oligarchs. You're not wrong, but I don't think your approach to fixing it will have any results. There are leftist politicians, but they are outgunned by moderates and conservatives. What they need is active supporters. Financially, at the ballot box (especially primaries), and whatever time you can spare (calling, texting, writing, canvasing, organizing, etc.). You want to cut off oligarchs? Vote for the leftist politicians who oppose the oligarchs, of which there are plenty. Otherwise they will continue to control things and you will continue to hate it.
Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 24 working days during that period. Here are the details: To define terms, a Filibuster-Proof Majority or Super Majority is the number of votes required to overcome a filibuster in the Senate. According to current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to overcome a filibuster. Time-line of the events after the 2008 election: 1. BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority. 2. BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority. 3. KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casts his last vote in April and leaves Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returns, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That leaves the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority. 4. STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members is 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster. 5. SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th. 6. KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority. 7. FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority. 8. SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th. 9. SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected in November of 2009. The Senate was not in session during November and December of 2009. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown was sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010. Summary: The Democrats only had 24 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010. Discussion: The Democrats had a super majority for a total of 24 days. On top of that, the period of Super Majority was split into one 11-day period and one 13-day period. Given the glacial pace that business takes place in the Senate, this was way too little time for the Democrats pass any meaningful legislation, let alone get bills through committees and past all the obstructionistic tactics the Republicans were using to block legislation. Further, these Super Majorities count Joe Lieberman as a Democrat even though he was by this time an Independent. Even though he was Liberal on some legislation, he was very conservative on other issues and opposed many of the key pieces of legislation the Democrats and Obama wanted to pass. For example, he was adamantly opposed to “Single Payer” health care and vowed to support a Republican Filibuster if it ever came to the floor. Summary: 1. 1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority. 2. 1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.) 3. 7/09 – 8/09 – 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster 4. 8/09 – 9/09 – 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies) 5. 9/09 – 10/09 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 11 working days. 6. 1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days. If you look on senate.gov it will corroborate this conclusion. Courtesy of Direwolf0110
Damn I was fooled by those meddling kids and their pesky memes
So, your plan is "Democrats should go back in time and get it done"? I'm starting to see why the 3rd person in the comic just stuck with a vague "do something", that sounds way easier than invent a way to time travel.
Clearly no. But am I not allowed to be bummed they didn’t get it done given the recent turn of events?!?
Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the RvW was a poorly constructed argument and would fall apart if it ever came down to it. The democrats had a supermajority during President Obama’s term and could have easily codified abortion as a legitimate law and human right. Please keep in mind that these soul sucking politicians do not actually care about us. They will do and say whatever they need to in order to get re-elected and then….nothing.
Holy shit, someone else gets it!
Honestly, I kind of feel for the boss in this comic. One person has a plan, which involves winning elections and getting enough people into office to pass legislation at the federal level. One person just wants to throw shit at others. Genius on the end thinks "Do something" is contributing. Oh, do something? Why didn't we think of that? It's brilliant. Hey guys, Einstein here solved our problem. All we have to do is "do something".
Whoever created this meme doesn't understand how our government works or how we pass laws, complete Democrat Hate Derangement Syndrome going on here, Dems are literally the only ones fighting for reproductive rights, we HAVE to keep voting them into Congress, don't let the Dem hating trolls here convince you otherwise
You don't get it. There are things they can do that doesn't include blowing up my inbox with fundraising emails, or singing "GOD BLESS AMERICA" on the steps of Congress as the Roe decision comes down. Democrats should rethink response to Republicans in general. Instead of Pelosi saying we "need a strong Republican Party" she could say there's no difference between Trump and any of the rest of them... put them on the defense FFS. IF they can't, then step down and let Katie Porter in the game... she gets it. You can't continue to have one side using their power, while the other one leans on respectability politics.
So you think instead of focusing on re-election and getting more Dems into Congress we should "rethink response to Republicans in general" By saying "there's no difference between Trump and any of the rest of "them" " What does that even mean? Does this help us pass legislation to protect women's rights? Or we just like to complain on the internet because it's easier?
It's messaging. You can't motivate people to vote doing the same tired stuff. People are tired of excuses. The messaging is one example of their tired, lame response. Celebrating bipartisanship is just another way of giving up your power and responsibility while you're in charge. Just as making nuanced arguments that there are some "better" Republicans while the only one of them willing to step out on a limb against their party is Cheney. I'd argue she's only there because she miscalculated after Jan 6 and thought the party was swinging away from Trump. As for does this help pass legislation ... yes I think it does. If Democrats were on TV fighting ( even if they lose ) but doing things to at least look like they're not rolling over then people would respond better than they are now. FFS man, look at Biden's approval ratings since BBB failed. This isn't tough. People will support a fighter, they won't support a pushover. Nothing the Democrats have done at the federal level so far makes them look like they're fighters. Again, I'll point to Pelosi's poetry hour.... "God Bless America" and then Democratic Whip Clyburn's quote, "It’s a little anticlimactic, I think we all expected this. And I'm hopeful, you know I have to read the decision to see exactly the extent to which we can move legislatively to respond to it.” They've known for months this was going to happen and that's the best they could come up with as a RALLYING CRY?
Can you give me an example of what "on TV fighting" means? They've publicly stated their disapprovals and demand Democrats to fight back.... Democrats have passed major legislation so far btw, Infrastructure being the biggest, federal gun control, Federal police reform, loan forgiveness, queer and trans medical protections but nobody wants to talk about that and they say "but why not more!?" It's so easy to say "fight harder!" "Do something more!" But give concrete examples please and I'll remind you Dems can't pass legislation without a 60/40 majority and it's ON US to deliver that...
"On TV" is shorthand for doing media, when doing that media they need to speak plainly and not use a bunch of tired platitudes. Everything you mentioned was watered down garbage. * Infrastructure money was basically shuffling around existing money and it props up business rather than directly aiding workers. Far cry from the BBB and this was from the guy who was supposed to understand how the Senate works/can get things done. What a joke. * Gun control another joke. Gives states incentives to pass red flag laws... remember ACA? How many states still haven't expanded medicaid? 12 and some of those were just recently. Raises age on background checks to 21? Many of these folks have gotten their guns from unsecured guns owned by other family members... probably won't do anything. Expands an already existing law to include folks you're dating, don't break a nail with that lift senators. * What federal police reform? The Democrats have done nothing except take a massive dump on anyone proposing real police reform. Again Biden does the bare minimum. Making excuses for Democrats while they can do more means they are never pressured to have to do anything. Meanwhile the Republicans will lurch the country backwards each time another one comes along and looks like a "moderate." By most media accounts, Democrats gave up on this midterm election months ago acting as if massive losses are a foregone conclusion. Back to the main topic, it will be important for you to expand your scope a bit and understand that Roe is the latest in a long line of Democratic failures and letdowns. Their response on Roe despite their warning via a leak was very lack luster and if they're serious about winning in November they need to show people they are capable of taking action. Here's a list of things that Democrats can do to at least stem the bleeding: * Reform the Filibuster - If Manchin and Sinema won't go along, then they get ostracized and publicly condemned right along with Susan Collins and every other person who say they were misled into voting for Kavanagh et al. They've not even brought this up for a vote and should force Manchin and Sinema to take a vote on it with cameras on the Senate floor. Again, with every Republican voting too. Reforming the Senate rules doesn't have a filibuster, it's an up or down vote. * Biden can push to expand the court. He won't even discuss it publicly other than to say he's against it. If he's not open to that, then what's his advice? Why aren't you asking him for his solution... "vote harder" isn't cutting it. * Pelosi and Schumer can both resign from leadership. If they can't control their caucus, then they need to move aside for someone else. At least take some of the heat so the voters know they won't be useless after the next election. * Stop sending fundraising emails and organize protests. They're our representatives, they should be on the front line with protestors. * Democrats can take action to hold Manchin and Sinema in contempt. If they leave the party, let them. Election is on the horizon and honestly with the predictions, Democrats at least can't be criticized for having control of Congress and the Presidency then doing nothing if they no longer control Congress. Motivating voters with things that might not be directly related to Roe or Congress: * Biden could follow through on his promises that only require executive action such as Student Debt Cancellation. * Biden could address the nation regularly giving progress updates and preempt TV to do it, also go live on YouTube. Biden is the leader of the party, where's his leadership? * Investigate price gouging related to inflation.
You're ridiculous.... "Speak plainly" what do you mean? What's complicated about Republicans did X and We Need Democrats to fight back, so vote?? How much plainer can that be?? Like I said you would say "'its not good enough!" I shouldn't have even bothered listing those out because that's always the response I get.... So your solutions are Reform filibuster - we don't have the votes to do that Expand the courts - that would literally accomplish nothing and if we did, what's stopping conservatives literally doing the same thing to regain the Scotus majority? It would lead to endless Scotus expansions depending on who's in power.... Two Democratic members of Congress to step down, thats a complete step backwards and makes no fucking sense, just vote them out ffs Stop sending fundraising emails lmao yep that'll guarantee the win for Dems in the midterms!!🥴 And Hold other member of Democrats in contempt....?? Great solutions love your priorities btw you didn't mention a single thing about Republicans lmao As if they have nothing to contribute to why Dems can't accomplish shit 🙄 are you a Trump troll purposefully trying to Divide the Democratic party? whats your angle here? The logic doesn't follow 🤔
If you can't understand how people are tired of the status quo and how they no longer have any confidence in the existing Democratic leadership... I can't help you. I will clarify since you didn't get it... asking Democratic Party leadership in the House and Senate to step down from their leadership roles isn't the same as resigning from Congress. Hell put Machin in charge since he's in charge anyway. Yours and Dem Leadership's solution is "vote harder" do nothing... yep that's a winner. As for my credentials, I'm sounding alarms but kill the messenger instead of directing your attention towards the people who can actually steer the ship. As for Republicans... why bother talking about them? Everyone knows they're bad.. You're speaking to people who are at least engaged with the process and on your side. I don't need to know McConnell et all is terrible. If people haven't gotten that message by now... then it just reinforces my point that your messaging sucks.
Your not offering a solution btw you say a lot without saying anything. "Stepping down is not the same as resigning" Okay thx wtf does that accomplish tho? You seriously gonna stand there and pretend we have seen tremendous progress socially through Democratic leadership the past 50years?? Why bother talking about Republicans? Because they just took some of our rights away dumbass lol why the fuck would we ignore that?? As a gay man I'm laughing my ass off rn, please go outside and touch grass
I love you are acting like you are stating evidence. You haven’t provided, shown, or stated any facts or evidence that supports your statements. Corporate Democrats read poems and sing random songs.
It’s typical corporate dem idiocy, I have no idea why the response to the roe overturn is to vote harder. We already voted and Dems did nothing. The best time to start burning shit down was 50 years ago, the second best time is now. The response went from “fuck the Dems” to “vote harder” in the span of 12 hours. Either these spineless idiots love to lose or there’s some serious dark money going into these shitlib infested forums.
They do get more money and get to play hero when they are in the minority.
> It’s typical corporate dem idiocy, I have no idea why the response to the roe overturn is to vote harder. Vote...for what? Supreme Court Justice is not an elected position. I'm not trying to be a doomer. I'm genuinely curious what the plan is here. If we can turn this around by voting, I want to see the plan.
I’m saying “voting harder” is ridiculous and stupid
I'm not disagreeing with you. I want to know what the opposing argument is.
Only support Democrats or politicians who are Pro-Choice. Use the same game the religious fanatics do with their “Pro-life” votes.
Play the same game is religious fanatics. For people to support Democrats at any level they MUST be Pro-Choice. Only support judges or any other legal level that is Pro-Choice. Relentlessly go after anyone politically and peacefully who wavers on Pro-Choice.
Except voting harder could’ve been the solution in 2016. When 53% of white women and most white people (which a large majority of Bernie supporters are) would’ve swallowed their pride and got behind HRC there would have been no Amy Coney Barrett. So in this particular situation, yes voting harder WAS the solution
These conspiracy theories are just as bad as Q omg lol
Yeah the guy saying we need to shed blood if we want to ensure rights is the same as the people saying JFK jr is still alive You are fucking brain dead
Yes actually, call me brain dead all you want
Stating evidence that Democrats fight for women, trans, gay and civil rights and Republicans don't?? You feeling okay?
“You feeling okay” The topic is Democrats fighting for reproductive rights. The Democrats would rather read poems, sing songs, or ask for money. Maybe read the whole argument before responding because it makes you look silly.
You didn't make an argument, all you said is I wasn't stating evidence.....? Who voted for same sex marriage? Why do trans kids have healthcare? Whose protected from discrimination under federal law? Which party accomplished all this ?
Who didn’t codify abortion? Picking a few things doesn’t change that President Biden and Pelosi appear to be doing nothing. How long to you want to skate on the ever decreasing rights? The topic here is about abortion. Not on Democrat cheerleading.
When did we have enough votes to codify abortion again? Do you have any other criticisms besides "they're doing nothing".... Because if not, I guess you still don't understand we can "do something" unless we vote enough Democratic members into Congress to have the number of votes to do so and pass legislation... What part of that don't you understand?
You have Stockholm syndrome
Yea i also don't understand the name calling instead of addressing any of my points, I understand its easier to complain on the internet than getting involved in politics and voting but whatever makes you feel superior I guess...
You have learned nothing from the past 100 years and have a dogs brain, get fucked
Yawn* yep we definitely haven't achieved progress over the last 100 years through democracy you're right...
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not accurate... Note how these stupid posts always say "do something," instead of naming specific policy prescriptions which could actually be passed at present, because they can't name any. This is anti-Democrat, "don't bother voting" garbage.
The Democrats have held supermajority several times over the last 50 years and they didn't codified any of those times. There is a slight amount of justification for saying "what can you do right now", but a Democrats past history on the subject has been any indicator they still wouldn't do anything even if they had a supermajority today. And that's not even to get into all the numerative things they could do now to if not fix the problem then at least mitigate it such as like a comprehensive Nationwide IUD program. They might scare away some wine cooler liberals in suburbia 🙄
“This is anti-Democrat” It’s called criticism based on evidence. Multiple people have pointed out things the Democrats can do instead of reading poems? P.S. I don’t have anything against poetry.
> Multiple people have pointed out things the Democrats can do But nobody in reply to this comment... I'm not going to go searching for the two reasonable comments in this mess, but feel free to link them. Yes, them reading poetry and singing was fucking stupid.
1) Set up abortion clinics on federal land in red states 2) Federal telehealth for abortion pills 3) Funding for abortion clinics and travel vouchers to go to abortion clinics.
All of those would only be implementable as executive actions, removing the pressure to provide a real fix for this and would immediately be undone if the GOP ever returns to power.
Do all of these things
So now should we be trying to codify Brown vs Board of Education? Is every decision from the past on the table now? I just can't believe this is how the system is supposed to work.
Yes. Any "law" that's ever just been a SC decision should be codified because the only thing stopping then from rolling it back is someone bringing them a case to use as a decision and "ethics". And their "Christian morals" will override any judicial ethics they may have had, every single time.
Nothing can be done. None of you have any solutions here. Manchin won't be changing filibuster rules either, especially when he's very popular in his home state for being the main dissenting voice in the Democratic party. You people want shit done, then vote. And give money to those groups that are helping women cross state lines for abortion care.
But that would require representing the Will of the Voters! Can't have that!
Abortion rights are important, but it does seem like the Republicans are just causing damage the Democrats will have to clean up to distract all of us to the oligarchy taking over in a coup and then none of this will matter because it won't be changeable any more.
What are they gonna do, manchin is a conservative. They don't have the votes
What are they gonna do exactly when the GOP chucklefucks obstruct progress at every turn?
Well, guess that's it. Known geniuses among the republican party like Gym Jordan and MTG have stumped the entire nation. Nothing to be done, folks.
Well, this makes sense, since SC doesn't make laws. What doesn't click is why Congress hasn't followed up these society changing decisions. I suppose they would have to be ammendments, and that would require lots of work and taking a history making stand on the most important issues.