• alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    It doesn’t work that way for republicans. When republicans are in power, they don’t handicap themselves with the filibuster or the parliamentarian or PAYGO or let single members block everything without the threat of getting kicked off committee assignments and denied GOP funding/campaign resources.

    They chose to let Lieberman be the villain of the week because they don’t want the same things the left wants.

    You can whine that people won’t vote for politicians who don’t do what they elected them to do, but that’s not how democracy works. Doing things that are unpopular with the base and failing to do the things you were elected to do decreases turnout.

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Dems manage to filibuster plenty.

      Added this to my previous reply so you probably didn’t see it: There’s also the oddity of “we didn’t get exactly what we wanted in the first months, so we’re just going to give up for the next 6 years and then let Trump in. Surely that will work!” Want progress? Dems need consistent and overwhelming victories. Not 2 years out of every 16 years (the average of when the Dems have all 3 of presidency, house of reps, and senate).

      Oh ml user. Why do I bother.

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Dems manage to filibuster plenty.

        As soon as the republicans got into power they removed the filibuster.

        There’s also the oddity of “we didn’t exactly what we wanted in the first months

        Congrats, you understand how elections work. You do what you were elected to do and you don’t do things the base doesn’t want you to do or you decrease turnout.

        • minnow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          Republicans removed the filibuster only on the issue of judicial nominations. That might seem nitpicky but it’s a critical distinction.

          • nomy@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            Republicans removed the filibuster only on the issue of judicial nominations.

            Which, in hindsight it’s obvious why they wanted to do that, and makes it clear they had a coherent strategy the whole time.

        • someguy3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          Let me know when not voting in protest works! Any time now! [As Trump gleefully dismantles everything.] Ciao.