We can take a look at what Republicans do without a majority: stall for time, attack the moral character of the opposition, find loopholes in the procedural process that you’re technically not disallowed to do but annoy the shit out of everyone, and generally be as obstructionist as possible.
I wasn’t referring to the article, I was referring to what Senate Democrats can do in the current situation. At bare minimum, that can do what they were elected for as the opposition party. We don’t get even a noteworthy fraction of that, let alone extralegal measures.
This is the same excuse I’ve heard for 15 years, even while they had a majority. Meanwhile, Republicans seem able to get shit done even while in the minority. I’m tired of excuses. Do something useful or get the fuck out of government.
This is the same excuse I’ve heard every time I point out that dems don’t have enough votes to do something.
When I ask when dems had a majority they point to Manchin or Sinema or Lieberman as their example of a dem majority proving they are arguing in bad faith and/or don’t understand what a supermajority is.
Meanwhile republicans don’t even criticize their own for committing crimes so they continue to win elections.
You’re justifying Dems being ineffectual. We don’t want to hear it anymore. We’re tired of watching Republicans play dirty to get what they want while Democrats sit on their hands and complain that governing is hard. Republicans fight despite the odds and that’s why they win more than they should. Democrats could do the same but they choose not to. I don’t want their excuses. I want them to fight even if they eventually lose the battle. Giving up before it starts is completely unacceptable.
Meanwhile republicans don’t even criticize their own for committing crimes so they continue to win elections.
I think that’s a pretty bad takeaway. Republicans and other authoritarians oppose criticism of leadership, requiring obedience. That’s not something to aim for, IMO.
Really? Then why are Republicans able to win elections despite all the criticism against them, or does it conveniently only work in the one direction that supports your argument? This is such a ridiculous take.
I guess they’re supposed to take over the Capitol with guns and body armor or else we will continue to bitch and moan about the Democrats being the problem after we told everybody how apathetic we were about voting for them.
What are senate dems supposed to do without a majority? The voters decided to prevent them from being able to do anything.
We can take a look at what Republicans do without a majority: stall for time, attack the moral character of the opposition, find loopholes in the procedural process that you’re technically not disallowed to do but annoy the shit out of everyone, and generally be as obstructionist as possible.
The article is about Trump ignoring the law. How do they change that by doing the things you listed?
I wasn’t referring to the article, I was referring to what Senate Democrats can do in the current situation. At bare minimum, that can do what they were elected for as the opposition party. We don’t get even a noteworthy fraction of that, let alone extralegal measures.
As a party, democrats have voted against all of Trumps cabinet picks.
Blaming “Senate Democrats” for the votes of outliers like Fetterman who vote against party lines is disingenuous.
This is the same excuse I’ve heard for 15 years, even while they had a majority. Meanwhile, Republicans seem able to get shit done even while in the minority. I’m tired of excuses. Do something useful or get the fuck out of government.
This is the same excuse I’ve heard every time I point out that dems don’t have enough votes to do something.
When I ask when dems had a majority they point to Manchin or Sinema or Lieberman as their example of a dem majority proving they are arguing in bad faith and/or don’t understand what a supermajority is.
Meanwhile republicans don’t even criticize their own for committing crimes so they continue to win elections.
You’re justifying Dems being ineffectual. We don’t want to hear it anymore. We’re tired of watching Republicans play dirty to get what they want while Democrats sit on their hands and complain that governing is hard. Republicans fight despite the odds and that’s why they win more than they should. Democrats could do the same but they choose not to. I don’t want their excuses. I want them to fight even if they eventually lose the battle. Giving up before it starts is completely unacceptable.
We’re tired of your bad faith arguments.
I think that’s a pretty bad takeaway. Republicans and other authoritarians oppose criticism of leadership, requiring obedience. That’s not something to aim for, IMO.
There was so much criticism of anti-fascists that actual authoritarian fascists won the election.
Criticism isn’t just criticism. It is used by bots and propaganda to discourage voting for anti-fascists.
Really? Then why are Republicans able to win elections despite all the criticism against them, or does it conveniently only work in the one direction that supports your argument? This is such a ridiculous take.
The dems criticizing republicans aren’t their voter base. The republican voter base doesn’t criticize republicans.
Why does that need to be explained to you?
I guess they’re supposed to take over the Capitol with guns and body armor or else we will continue to bitch and moan about the Democrats being the problem after we told everybody how apathetic we were about voting for them.
But I want to criticize democrats until republicans win elections and then criticize democrats for not doing the things I prevented them from doing…