They literally could do it now. But as iron says “they don’t have the votes(even though if every Dem voted for what was needed to pass it they actually do)”.
Any serious attempt to restore abortion rights by definition includes filibuster and court reform. This political party doesn’t have that in them
1 Like
Expecting the caucus to vote in lockstep on such a consequential move, particularly when most here think the Rs are going to win the Senate, is unreasonable.
They can’t because Sinema and Manchin don’t want to. Which is why he said they don’t have the votes. It’s hard to know what would happen in the alternative reality where those two are replaced by two progressives.
How many Senators would you think we would need? No chance at nuking the filibuster so 60 minimum except a handful of Dems are pro-life so 65(because we can’t expect the entire caucus to support a women’s right to control her own body/healthcare that’s totally unreasonable)? So again my point is the Dems are running on something they have no intention to do absolutely anything about. Which actually is very on brand. Anyone with a brain is rolling their eyes at this point.
Even in some fantasy land where the Dems were capable of doing anything they won’t reform the supreme court because norms so anything would get turbo nuked anyways.
1 Like
50 if we replaced those two with different ones. Aren’t they the only two unwilling to nuke the filibuster for really important stuff.
I didn’t know we has some pro-life DEM senators. Which of the remaining 48 fit that description?
I’d put the o/u at 54.5. The Democratic Party has moved a ways left since Obama
2 Likes
Yep. There were a few competitive races for local offices and a ballot prop about the minimum wage for tipped employees, so still had some things to weigh in on.
I have no idea. And that’s a big part of the problem.
Have the other 48 senators come out with a single statement that says “If you keep all of our senators in office and flip two states, we will nuke the filibuster to codify Roe”? Why not? I don’t know how I’m supposed to come away with the concept that they actually care.
1 Like
Cool, so since the 2024 map is a horror show, this is our only chance.
Hold on to everything and flip PA/OH/WI/NC and maybe need FL or IA also. Simple as that. Probably a 1 in 1000 outcome.
You have to learn to distinguish between not caring and not willing to blow up norms to achieve a policy goal. It would also be helpful to learn that the Dems don’t do anything, the Senate does. To have a functioning democracy, you have to accept that some things won’t go your way and that people disagreeing with you isn’t worth forever war.
1 Like
If the other side wasn’t openly fascist and openly talking about essentially ending democracy I would agree with you.
Maybe they won’t go through with it. Maybe we somehow hold enough power the next few elections to fade it. But if we don’t not blowing up norms to try and actually protect a functioning democracy is going to look very silly in hindsight.
1 Like
Some serious e-dem delusion ITT. They are never codifying Roe. They are never passing universal voting rights. That ship has sailed. GJGE.
2 Likes
Right. Which is why I only care very modestly about elections.
I don’t think anyone is disputing that. The discussion is about why it won’t happen (in the future). Is it because they don’t want to or solely because they can’t?
Early voted today. Went 3rd party in an uncompetitive race. Shrug.
1 Like
Or maybe we can address the wage gap and the homelessness problem?
It sure is nice to see some fucking genuineness in the party
1 Like
The bar is so low that you get credit for going to Target and fist bumping plebs.
2 Likes
How do you feel about the prisoner’s dilemma with respect to this ideology?