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).
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.
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.
As soon as the republicans got into power they removed the filibuster.
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.
Republicans removed the filibuster only on the issue of judicial nominations. That might seem nitpicky but it’s a critical distinction.
Which, in hindsight it’s obvious why they wanted to do that, and makes it clear they had a coherent strategy the whole time.
Let me know when not voting in protest works! Any time now! [As Trump gleefully dismantles everything.] Ciao.
This is not a strategy it is a description of how elections work.