Yes, Republicans were immensely cooperative throughout the Obama years, and imminently reasonable.
Then, suddenly, simultaneously out of both nowhere and 25 years in Congress, up popped Bernie Sanders.
This, somehow, leads to a totally different person supporting a decrease in the minimum voting age. Which I guess we should all assume is super evilbad?
Which, ergo, propter hoc, ipsa loquitur and stuff, mandates the conclusion of "anti-Democrat Progressives." Somehow.
This...has something to do with how many seats the Dems currently hold in the Senate? I guess?
In all events the obvious solution to these imagined causes is to continue alienating half the blue tent.
Praytell, how exactly does this "Plan B" of yours lead to more Democrats winning elections?
It's not the Republicans we have to deal with--it's the broad parts of our own coalition. Unfortunately, a "base only" strategy can only work for Republicans because they're better distributed geographically and more diligent about turning out. Democrats simply have to appeal to a broader group, and that means tougher compromises, and more progress.
I'm as quick as anyone to deplore the Dead End Leftists who didn't show up in 2016, but you vastly overstate the case among leftists in general. The vast majority did reluctantly vote for Hillary (she did better in the general among Bernie voters than Obama did in the 2008 general among Hillary voters). And a crackup among our coalition would be suicide. Stand together or fall alone.
Seems like a recipe for "Democrats in Disarray". I'm as quick as anyone to rip Manchin and Sinema for their filibuster nonsense but we are far better with them holding their seats than Republicans. If you can't see that then you really forgot how things were looking just before the Georgia runoffs. And for all their faults, our wavering Dems are still the reason we passed important things like stimulus, approved a Cabinet and judges, and are even TALKING about these other pieces of legislation. This wouldn't even be a discussion if Mitch ran the floor. So let's keep some perspective, and focus on passing what we can, and gaining seats next chance we get.
John Lewis Act is probably the most important piece of legislation in debate, and the Manchin compromise basically incorporates it. It's also an easier sell to the general public than S1, which contains a lot of stuff that is both far more controversial and far less likely to pass court muster (e.g., campaign finance provisions).
Though frankly? Nothing Congress is doing, or can do, addresses the threat of Republicans decertifying elections.
GI (Gastrointestinal) Joe and “I’m So Unusual” Barbie are Pigs… but we haven’t even seen a Vote count… because there are more Democrats who would likely side with them and the Chamber of Commerce and the Corporations.
41,000,000 more Americans voted for Democrats last year… and we still got this shit to deal with.
Pure coincidence, as it happens.
We don't allow misogynist insults here. Stop it. Please review the rules.
— Dok Zoom, Yr Friendly Neighborhood Comments Moderator
Lots of us DO see it happening. It’s entirely plausible that they’ll engage in a coordinated attempt to steal the House..
?????
Yes, Republicans were immensely cooperative throughout the Obama years, and imminently reasonable.
Then, suddenly, simultaneously out of both nowhere and 25 years in Congress, up popped Bernie Sanders.
This, somehow, leads to a totally different person supporting a decrease in the minimum voting age. Which I guess we should all assume is super evilbad?
Which, ergo, propter hoc, ipsa loquitur and stuff, mandates the conclusion of "anti-Democrat Progressives." Somehow.
This...has something to do with how many seats the Dems currently hold in the Senate? I guess?
In all events the obvious solution to these imagined causes is to continue alienating half the blue tent.
Praytell, how exactly does this "Plan B" of yours lead to more Democrats winning elections?
Apologies, it did seem odd but the information looked legit.
Did 250,000 Michgan voters cast their votes for Stein and Johnson, or didn't they?
A copyeditor would have been nice.
Assuming they did, what does that have to do with the present-day makeup of the Senate?
Or even with Sanders, for that matter? They didn't vote for Sanders. And Sanders is not the problem in the Senate.
Of course, if Chewbacca was a Wookie and he lived on Endor, you must acquit.
It's not the Republicans we have to deal with--it's the broad parts of our own coalition. Unfortunately, a "base only" strategy can only work for Republicans because they're better distributed geographically and more diligent about turning out. Democrats simply have to appeal to a broader group, and that means tougher compromises, and more progress.
I'm as quick as anyone to deplore the Dead End Leftists who didn't show up in 2016, but you vastly overstate the case among leftists in general. The vast majority did reluctantly vote for Hillary (she did better in the general among Bernie voters than Obama did in the 2008 general among Hillary voters). And a crackup among our coalition would be suicide. Stand together or fall alone.
Seems like a recipe for "Democrats in Disarray". I'm as quick as anyone to rip Manchin and Sinema for their filibuster nonsense but we are far better with them holding their seats than Republicans. If you can't see that then you really forgot how things were looking just before the Georgia runoffs. And for all their faults, our wavering Dems are still the reason we passed important things like stimulus, approved a Cabinet and judges, and are even TALKING about these other pieces of legislation. This wouldn't even be a discussion if Mitch ran the floor. So let's keep some perspective, and focus on passing what we can, and gaining seats next chance we get.
John Lewis Act is probably the most important piece of legislation in debate, and the Manchin compromise basically incorporates it. It's also an easier sell to the general public than S1, which contains a lot of stuff that is both far more controversial and far less likely to pass court muster (e.g., campaign finance provisions).
Though frankly? Nothing Congress is doing, or can do, addresses the threat of Republicans decertifying elections.
Ta, Stephen.
The Republicans know, if they can’t steal votes, they’ll never win another Federal Election.
No offense, but fuck the “Bernie Sanders Legacy” Bullshit.
GI (Gastrointestinal) Joe and “I’m So Unusual” Barbie are Pigs… but we haven’t even seen a Vote count… because there are more Democrats who would likely side with them and the Chamber of Commerce and the Corporations.
41,000,000 more Americans voted for Democrats last year… and we still got this shit to deal with.