385
submitted 2 months ago by geekwithsoul@lemm.ee to c/politics@lemmy.world

“Federal Election Commission records show Stein paid $100,000 in July to a consulting outfit that has worked with Republican campaigns, as well as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent presidential bid. The firm, Accelevate, is operated by Trent Pool. The Intercept reported that he appeared to be part of the mob that breached the grounds of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6., 2021. The Journal hasn’t independently verified the reporting.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

No action?

On behalf of my gay daughter who will be able to marry who she wants to because of Democrats, I just want to say [REDACTED SO I WON'T GET BANNED]. And on behalf of my son, who is trans, [THESE WORDS WOULD ALSO GET ME BANNED].

Come to think of it, I have Democrats to thank for a return to sane pandemic policies, and Democrats to thank for the Inflation Reduction Act, the most impactful environmental legislation in thirty years. So you can take your "no action" and [NOPE, NOT GONNA SAY IT].

I'm under no illusion that Democrats are perfect, but they've been as effective as possible, given the situation with literal Russian assets on the other side of the aisle, trying as hard as possible to destroy America.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

On behalf of my gay daughter who will be able to marry who she wants to because of Democrats

Democratic legislators won't protect her marriage by codifying Obergefell, just like they refused to codify Roe when they had the chance. Democratic legislators spent decades on half-measures and it had to be decided by the Supreme Court instead. Now that sort of incrementalism is a dead end. SCOTUS works against the people.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

What part of the last two decades had a filibuster-proof Democratic supermajority in the Senate? I'll tell you: A two-week span under Obama, during which Ted Kennedy was busily dying in a hospital.

And what part of the last two decades had sufficient Democratic votes to eliminate or reform the filibuster? I'll tell you that, too: None.

Perfect is the enemy of the good. Democrats have been good for my daughter. Republicans are guaranteed, 100%, to be much, much worse. Stop trying to sabotage her future.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Stop trying to sabotage her future.

When the Supreme Court overturns Obergefell, what's Democrats' plan to get her rights back? We gave them the necessary majorities to codify both Roe and Obergefell, and they did neither. And I'm not seeing any concrete plans to move the needle back on Roe. Do you suppose there are any for Obergefell?

When it happens, will you also make excuses for how the party squandered majorities that we gave them?

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

When? When exactly did we give them those "necessary majorities?" The last time Democrats held a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate was a two-week stretch during the Obama presidency, while Ted Kennedy was dying in a hospital bed.

And do you think denying Democrats Senate seats in the future will help my kids more somehow? Spell out how carrying water for Republicans is going to help them.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

Any time in which Democrats had at least 50 was sufficient to kill the filibuster forever. We gave them necessary majorities and they squandered them.

And do you think denying Democrats Senate seats in the future will help my kids more somehow?

Did I say that? I can criticize Democrats when they're useless (which is virtually always) without wanting fewer of them in the Senate.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

My apologies. I've been getting inundated by people who purport to believe that dividing the left up is a winning strategy, and mistakenly clumped you in with them.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago
[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Thanks. And for the record, I agree with you that it's 100% fair to criticize Democrats when they don't live up to their promises.

this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
385 points (93.1% liked)

politics

19144 readers
1836 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS