He can't do any of it without a filibuater-proof Senate majority (which could mean 51 Senators who are willing to amend the filibuster at the start of the 2025 session).
They've had dozens of chances for that over dozens of years and won't because they need that rotating villain in the event they can't find someone from their own party to be the rotating villain.
They've had dozens of chances for that over dozens of years
From 1980-present the Democratic party has had a filibuater-proof majority in the Senate once, in Obama's first 2 years, and they passed the ACA with it.
The Senate only needs 51 votes to eliminate the filibuster. With Independents they have that right now
Except Cinema Sinema and Manchin have both stated that changing the filibuster is a hard no for both of them. So no, we do not have 51 Senators caucusing Democratic and willing to touch the filibuster.
And where were the calls to primary anyone that would vote against it?
You're coming across like you just like to rage without actually paying attention.
Voters had been calling for a primary challenge to both for basically the entirety of Biden's term (since some of the earliest legislative efforts with reconciliation bills including a minimum wage increase, I believe), up until they both registered as Independent and neither are running for re-election, so the primary became moot. However, the W. Virginia seat (Manchin's) is likely to go R this year, so that doesn't help us for things like judicial appointments where Manchin was reliable. Arizona (Sinema's seat) we have a chance.
Calls to primary are irrelevant when those same people would head to the polls and reelect them. There is no accountability, they can get away with murder and voters (VBNMW types) will still cast a vote for that murderer as long as there is a D by their name.
Now you're just sounding like you're posting in bad faith. You asked "where were the calls to primary" and in your very next comment you're saying "calls to primary are irrelevant" as though it was my point and you're refuting it. There's not enough accountability because voter turnout in the primaries is absolute garbage. Protest voting in the general is useless. We need overwhelming turnout in the primaries for the state legislatures to get better candidates in the general. Election reform to enable viable 3rd party candidates will only come on a state-by-state level. And that will never happen without good turnout in the primaries.
It's not a bad faith argument, the few saying primary candidates before the election are the same ones that will vote for them anyway. Politicians have no incentive to bend to the will of their constituents if they continue to be rewarded for bad behavior.
Protest voting in the general is useless
This is voter suppression, it's telling people 'vote my way or else it's a wasted vote.' And it's always 'do it my way this time, we can think about reform later', later never comes.
You asked where are the calls to primary, I told you that the calls to primary were made, and you then said calls to primary are irrelevant. You did not have faith in your own point.
I'm not in a position of authority to suppress anybody's vote, and I'm not telling anyone to not vote. I am, in fact, advocating for more people to vote, and to do so more often and more consistently. That's kind of the opposite of voter suppression. Protest voting is how we got Trump when Clinton was the nominee. The next President will be either the Democratic nominee or the Republican nominee. There will be other choices, but they won't win, voting for them just lowers the number of votes that the major party candidate on the opposite end of the spectrum need to beat to win. If I was opposed to election reform, I wouldn't be out here encouraging people to vote in the primaries. I would be keeping silent while they continue to ignore how long their tactic has failed at achieving the goal. But I support election reform, so I vote in the primaries and encourage other people to do the same.
Meaning the calls to primary were not serious. Time and again voters complain then reelect the people they are complaining about. That's why the DNC are not even campaigning, they know they can do jack shit and voters will still vote for them. Many feel trapped by the system while they keep supporting it because they have been convinced there are no other choices and anything but a vote for their oppressors is a wasted vote.
He better hop to it, hes only got 7 more months.
He can't do any of it without a filibuater-proof Senate majority (which could mean 51 Senators who are willing to amend the filibuster at the start of the 2025 session).
They've had dozens of chances for that over dozens of years and won't because they need that rotating villain in the event they can't find someone from their own party to be the rotating villain.
From 1980-present the Democratic party has had a filibuater-proof majority in the Senate once, in Obama's first 2 years, and they passed the ACA with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_States_Congresses
The Senate only needs 51 votes to eliminate the filibuster. With Independents they have that right now
Except
CinemaSinema and Manchin have both stated that changing the filibuster is a hard no for both of them. So no, we do not have 51 Senators caucusing Democratic and willing to touch the filibuster.And where were the calls to primary anyone that would vote against it?
You're coming across like you just like to rage without actually paying attention.
Voters had been calling for a primary challenge to both for basically the entirety of Biden's term (since some of the earliest legislative efforts with reconciliation bills including a minimum wage increase, I believe), up until they both registered as Independent and neither are running for re-election, so the primary became moot. However, the W. Virginia seat (Manchin's) is likely to go R this year, so that doesn't help us for things like judicial appointments where Manchin was reliable. Arizona (Sinema's seat) we have a chance.
Calls to primary are irrelevant when those same people would head to the polls and reelect them. There is no accountability, they can get away with murder and voters (VBNMW types) will still cast a vote for that murderer as long as there is a D by their name.
Now you're just sounding like you're posting in bad faith. You asked "where were the calls to primary" and in your very next comment you're saying "calls to primary are irrelevant" as though it was my point and you're refuting it. There's not enough accountability because voter turnout in the primaries is absolute garbage. Protest voting in the general is useless. We need overwhelming turnout in the primaries for the state legislatures to get better candidates in the general. Election reform to enable viable 3rd party candidates will only come on a state-by-state level. And that will never happen without good turnout in the primaries.
It's not a bad faith argument, the few saying primary candidates before the election are the same ones that will vote for them anyway. Politicians have no incentive to bend to the will of their constituents if they continue to be rewarded for bad behavior.
This is voter suppression, it's telling people 'vote my way or else it's a wasted vote.' And it's always 'do it my way this time, we can think about reform later', later never comes.
You asked where are the calls to primary, I told you that the calls to primary were made, and you then said calls to primary are irrelevant. You did not have faith in your own point.
I'm not in a position of authority to suppress anybody's vote, and I'm not telling anyone to not vote. I am, in fact, advocating for more people to vote, and to do so more often and more consistently. That's kind of the opposite of voter suppression. Protest voting is how we got Trump when Clinton was the nominee. The next President will be either the Democratic nominee or the Republican nominee. There will be other choices, but they won't win, voting for them just lowers the number of votes that the major party candidate on the opposite end of the spectrum need to beat to win. If I was opposed to election reform, I wouldn't be out here encouraging people to vote in the primaries. I would be keeping silent while they continue to ignore how long their tactic has failed at achieving the goal. But I support election reform, so I vote in the primaries and encourage other people to do the same.
Meaning the calls to primary were not serious. Time and again voters complain then reelect the people they are complaining about. That's why the DNC are not even campaigning, they know they can do jack shit and voters will still vote for them. Many feel trapped by the system while they keep supporting it because they have been convinced there are no other choices and anything but a vote for their oppressors is a wasted vote.