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
19096 readers
2413 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
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.