413
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2024
413 points (98.8% liked)
politics
18059 readers
2666 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Y'all need to unfuck your supreme court
Can't. Literally can't. Give up on us, we're done.
You can. But don't want to do what it takes: voting. For Dems specifically.
Bullshit. I vote for Dems in every election and I vote in every election.
But those traitorous fucks are there for life and you know they will hold on as long as they can to do at much damage at possible. There's no mechanism to remove them that has a chance at success as long as the fascist Republican party exists. We're fucked for generations
If you really need me to amend what I said: It takes consistent and overwhelming Dem victories.
We knew that already
Oh yes, because the dems have an interest in this.
(They could have fixed it. They didn’t.)
When could they have fixed this?
When they had control of the house and senate. You remember all the whole “we could pack the court by expanding the seats” thing?
They didn’t in part because of manchin and sinema being doucheburgers, but Biden was vocally opposed to it as well.
They had control of the house but never the senate.
You still have to overcome the fillabuster, and that takes 60 votes. And with Manchin and Sinema practically Republicans you'll never be able to scrap that stupid rule.
They didn’t have the majority? that’s interesting. Then why the fuck was Schumer the majority leader of the 117th congress? (Specifically Jan 3rd ‘21 through ja. 3rd 2023.)
Oh. That’s right they had control.
As for the filibuster…. they could have just gotten rid of it with the numbers they had.
You not read the whole Manchin and Sinema part of my post? Both are now independents and Manchin literally said he won't vote to end the fillabust
You didn’t see the part in my original comment where I recognized their obstinacy?
Or the part where Biden was opposed to packing the courts anyhow?
Why would Biden publicly announce that he wants to pack the courts, and get all of the negative political consequences of that, while at the same time having a 0% chance of adding even one Justice, therefore getting absolutely none of the benefits?
They had the majority in name only two of the Dems were almost more liberal Republicans and any attempt to force some of the more liberal legislation through was torpedoed by those two consistently.
Yeah, so they can find just enough no votes and gleefully announce their hands are tied.
What are you even on about. Oh I recognize you.
Not my fault you haven't been paying attention.
Actually the supreme Court is an appointed for life position so unless it gets stuffed again, it can only be changed when justices die or leave voluntarily. Ergo it's literally unfixable by the common citizen unless revolution is on the table.
Geez I wonder how the GOP did it...
By asking the Dems not to fill a vacancy they had every right to fill and watching the Dems self implode instead of filling the vacancy.
Wow you don't even know how it works, but you're filled with indignation. The GOP controlled Senate refused to approve Obama's pick.
Your take is so bad that it's misinformation.
Trying to, unfortunately Republicans aren't the only ones seeking to destroy everything - the Democrats doing a damn fine job as well:-(. This isn't bOtH sIdEs BS, I'm saying that one side had a majority and did something with it, then the other side had that and... didn't. Thus by the ratchet effect, they win by default. Biden's Presidency has done so much, but the Democratic party as a whole not so much.
This is literally bOtHsIdEs bs.
I cannot imagine "knowing" as much as you, when it seems to me that the more I study, the more facets, nuances, and subtleties I uncover. Trying to fathom the idea that there are precisely and only two of every single thing on earth - genders, political parties, black or white, good or bad, even day vs. night - when what I see is a rainbow of spectral complexity, for example a very cloudy (rainy?) day or a bright moonlit night... is too constraining, nay actually heart-rending for me to do for long. You may feel free to keep your eyes squeezed shut if you must, but I promise you that if you peek out of them, you will see wonders abounding!
Anyway you are correct - it is both sides(-er-ism). But also... it is not?
"I wasted time, and now doth time waste me; for now hath time made me his numbering clock: my thoughts are minutes; and with sighs they jar their watches on unto mine eyes, the outward watch, the heart, where sorrow lies."