• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Colin Parkinson said:
Considering how long impeachment would take and the pitfalls, I think your 2nd option is much more useful and with better chances of winning the POTUS.
Click to expand...
A variation has been tried before by several Democratic-controlled Houses, in which they send bills to a Republican-controlled Senate where they know the bills won't advance. Then they bleat that Republicans are against whatever fairy tale happy ending story accompanies the bill, and about 5 minutes later social media are awash with the details of whatever poison pills were in the bill to assure failure. In short, it doesn't work, except to excite the Democratic base.

First they'll have to change the filibuster rule, or bills that are just facades won't even reach the president's desk. Changing that rule won't win them any points with most independents, and it won't be something they can hope to durably undo during the lame duck session following the next Senate flip back to Republican control.

If they don't want to eat the damage of changing the rule (and granting Republicans the same power for the future*), they'll have to bring forward bills substantively useful to Republicans, and if that's the case, they probably will have enough votes to override a veto. The gambit sounds like fun, but is somewhere between dangerous to future Democratic electoral prospects and impractical depending on how it's executed.

*Democrats typically have a lot more ambitions for new legislation than Republicans, so undoing the Senate filibuster gives Republicans the advantage (to easily undo whatever Democrats do). Being able to use the filibuster to protect whatever legislation they do get passed during their periods out of full control is critical to Democrats. They'd be cutting their own throats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top