this post was submitted on 16 May 2024
161 points (86.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35393 readers
5 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been wondering for a bit why during the time the Democrats controlled the legislature, executive, and judicial branches during Obama's first term in 2008 more wasn't accomplished. Shouldn't that have been the opportunity to make Row V Way law and fix the electoral college? I understand the recession was going on but outside of Obamacare getting passed which didnt go far enough it seems like they didn't really do much with all that power. Are there other important accomplishments from this time that didn't get the news they deserved? It seems like the voters have done their job in the past to elect people to fix things and yet we are still here begging people to vote to fix issues like abortion rights.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 140 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Routine abuse of the filibuster rules by Republicans was a big part of it. Not the only reason, but a fairly major one as I recall.

And while I am a Democrat and I vote that way, I very readily admit the Democrats often bring a book to a gun fight when it comes to politics. They have good intentions but then they get steamrollered on things like SCOTUS appointments....

[–] [email protected] 44 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Democrats have been playing by the rules and norms for far too long. Norms only matter if both teams follow them. Same thing with the rules. If Republicans will change the rules so that they win Democrats have to follow suit or make it illegal. When one side plays dirty, the other can either play dirty or lose. Moral high ground gains us nothing.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

"Things are kinda shitty so we should make them all the way shitty" isn't the argument you think it is.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Democrats had the ability to change procedural rules and prevent filibustering - they chose not to.

Unfortunately, the lack of progress when Dems controlled all three branches is because conservative democrats didn't want that progress. While Democrats controlled all three branches liberals did not.

We need to understand that there's a strong conservative presence in the DNC or else we'll be blindsided by this issue again. The lack of progress was on Democrats - we can't shift the blame to Republicans (though they're definitely more shitty).

[–] [email protected] -4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

One of things that annoys me most is people on the Left who act like the overwhelming majority of people in the country agree with them.

According to the best estimate I've seen, 44% of the people "somewhat agree" with Socialism, and about 6% are "strongly" in favor of Socialism.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not certain what your point is - we're not talking about socialism here and that word is a misunderstood flashpoint to Americans. If you ask Americans if they want to live in a socialist country I wouldn't be surprised if only 6% said yes - but when you describe Scandinavian democratic socialism purely by stating policy stances it tends to be pretty popular.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

And yet, Obamacare barely passed and Trump managed to pass a huge tax cut for the rich.

Look how many people were outraged when AOC wore a dress that said 'Tax The Rich.'

I wish I was in the majority, but I know I'm not.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Though if I recall correctly, filibuster rule can be removed with 51% majority but obviously Democrats are too nice to remove that.

[–] notnotmike 25 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Less nice, more realizing that would remove their ability to stop the Republicans when the political winds inevitability shift the other way

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Right, which is why I've been saying that the Democrats should restore the filibuster. What they have now is not a filibuster, in practice, it's more akin to an administrative hold. One Senator indicates an intent to filibuster via email, and they move on to other business.

Make 'em do it. Pick a popular issue, and lean into it. Make the Republicans actually stand up there at the podium and talk for hours. Get them on camera on the news every night as obstructionists, blocking the will of the people. Yes, it will waste Senate session time; that's a perfect opportunity for all of the Democrats to roast them non-stop to reporters. It'll be painful for a while, but at least has a chance of breaking the log jam. (And if the GQP doesn't take the bait, hey, popular thing gets passed!)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Filibustering is dumb and it shouldn't exist - if we want the ability for a narrow minority to block law making we should just increase the threshold to pass laws - we shouldn't allow a weird procedural rule to block discussion of a law whether through talking a long time or just doing so by email.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Oh did Democrats stop the Republicans when the winds shifted?

Oh no they didn't. They went along with them.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Oh did Democrats stop the Republicans when the winds shifted?

Oh no they didn't. They went along with them.

What the hell are you talking about? Your comment is entirely divorced from reality. There were 175 cloture votes to break a filibuster on nominees during the Obama administration and 314 during Trump. Nearly doubled in half the time.

When Schumer was minority leader, he vigorously used the filibuster to do just that. Under his leadership, Democrats used the filibuster to block funding for construction of Trump’s border wall in 2019. They used it not once, but twice to impede passage of the Cares Act — forcing Republicans to agree to changes including a $600 weekly federal unemployment supplement. They used it in September and October to stop Republicans from passing further coronavirus relief before the November election. They used it to halt Sen. Tim Scott’s (R-S.C.) police reform legislation so Republicans could not claim credit for forging a bipartisan response to the concerns of racial justice protesters. They used it to block legislation to force “sanctuary cities” to cooperate with federal officials, and to stop a prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion, bans on abortions once the unborn child is capable of feeling pain, and protections for the lives of babies born alive after botched abortions. - Washington Post

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Crickets from the peanut gallery🤣

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Couldn't the republicans just do the same thing and remove it when they get a 51% majority

[–] notnotmike 3 points 5 months ago

I would imagine its a case of mutually assured destruction. Neither wants to repeal it because they know once they do, they open up Pandora's box and Congress will be even more of a disaster than it currently is

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

While I disagree with it, there is a valid argument that getting rid of the filibuster would become an absolute disaster once Republicans gain the majority.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

It's an easy rotating villain they can pull out at their convenience

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Honestly, it’s not that they bring a book to a gunfight.

It’s that they keep bringing a book to a gunfight, and expect a different result every time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's almost like they're not really trying

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No, it's like the base expects perfection at every turn and it just isn't possible. A Republican fucks up and people rally to him, a Dem fucks up and they are expected to resign or recuse or whatever. The D always has to be the bigger person and our "big tent" is full of about 50 issues that can't sit the hell down for two minutes to let something get done.

It's a bunch of whiny little bitch kids that won't punch for the throat because precedent and social issue du jour. What is really necessary is to put on some teeth kicking shoes and step up to the plate, but my other compatriot Dems just don't allow that sort of behavior. They go low and we should start kicking... But we don't.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I hear you, and I completely agree with your reasons WHY we can't compete, but at the same time, if and when we resort to lies and cheating, are we still the good guys or just more bad guys with a different color flag?

Most of the Republican party thinks they ARE the good guys. They are protecting the rest of us from the evils of an oppressive gubment and/or a vengeful God.

Obviously, you and I don't agree with that, but I feel more confident that I'm on the right side knowing that we're at least playing by the rules.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I don't think it has to be lies and cheating, but there's a pre-emptive reaction on the left of "we can't do that, because what happens when the shoe is on the other foot?". But then what happens? Those issues are abused anyway on the right.

IMO the first order of business ought to have been pack the courts, push the limits of gerrymandering, and anything else that guarantees easy wins until there's a lawsuit that leads to legislation that codifies the rules for bad faith situations in law.

Basically force the grey out of grey areas and ride the easy wins. The slack in the system is the main thing that is being constantly abused. Unfortunately the electorate on our side is to interested making politicians "earn the vote" by chasing every car on the street and never catching any of them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

But when playing by the rules guarantees that you’ll lose (perhaps permanently) because the other guy’s blatantly cheating… does that matter?

To borrow a rather melodramatic quote:

Stand in the ashes of a trillion dead souls, and ask the ghosts if honor matters. The silence is your answer.

I get your point. I really do. But when the fight is existential, the constraints are radically different.

Let’s put it another way: if this next election was a D20, it’s like generating crit fails on 9+D4, because the other team has been fucking with the rules behind our backs. And a crit fail means you have a 3/D4 chance of not being allowed to roll any dice ever again.

In plain English: the structure of our electoral system means that the bar for success of one team is quantitatively lower than their opponents, and due to the extreme nature of the party that’s benefiting from that unbalanced system (Republicans), it’s very possible they’ll stop allowing any remotely fair elections to occur.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

The current state of US politics is a direct consequence of Mitch McConnell's campaign of obstruction and spin. When we go to civil war in November and your fellow Americans are bleeding out in the streets because we wouldn't get on board with support for Zionist genocide, think of him.