There is absolutely no way the universe is magical and full enough of wonder for this to be what happened. There’s not a man among us with the necessary positive karma for this to be true.
Trump administration 2024-2028
- Thread starter dimsum
- Start date
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,633
- Points
- 1,040
Well, if it makes you feel better. Even UFC Dana thinks the MAGA brand is radioactive now.
- Reaction score
- 3,219
- Points
- 1,090
its always an adventure
- Reaction score
- 12,423
- Points
- 1,040
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.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 23,464
- Points
- 1,260
I fervently hope aliens are watching this shit show. Then they can beam down or however they get here and straighten things out, cause it seems we as a species can’t.
- Reaction score
- 19,395
- Points
- 1,160
Except in this version, the bills will likley clear both houses and if they are aimed at something the public want and something else that Trump hates, it may cause him to veto an otherwise popular bill.
- Reaction score
- 12,423
- Points
- 1,040
As long as the Senate filibuster rule remains, there aren't going to be many bills that clear both houses and can't override a presidential veto.
With the filibuster rule in place, a bill that can clear the Senate by definition has at least 60% support. Overall, Democrats are going to have more than half the votes in both chambers; if merely one-third of Republicans join that gets over the two-thirds threshold for an override.
Members know where a bill is going before it ever comes to a vote and the vote simply legitimizes something already negotiated and decided. If the Senate clearly indicates that enough Republicans are joining to get past a filibuster, everyone knows the bill is at least going to clear Congress and that it has close to two-thirds support in the Senate. If Republican members disinclined to support a Democratic bill see that it will nevertheless have enough votes to override a veto, there will be a preference cascade in favour of the bill. I expect most bills that get enough votes to override a veto to get well past two-thirds. It's pointless and self-damaging (except for those House members who represent strongly pro-Trump districts, if such things actually exist) to cast a futile vote against a bill that is popular and can't be stopped. Trump might be stubborn enough to pointlessly veto a bill that is coming to him with over two-thirds support, but it will only impose a slight delay on the inevitable.
I've been enjoying watching some of the framing. People talk and write as if the Republicans are going to have to yield to Democratic demands. Democrats are still going to have to find something to trade, too.
The key is to keep it as simple as possible. Write that minimum wage increase legislation on one page. Dare Trump to veto it. And given how much poorer a lot of red states are, that would be interesting to see. Do the same with restoring Obamacare, etc.
It requires discipline to keep bills tight and not add amendments. But if executed well, either Republicans will provide a veto proof majority to pass it or they vote it down or Trump vetos and then 2028 becomes easier for the Democrats.
After all, cost of living and healthcare sucks right now. And it's not like the public is giving much grace to the GOP on those. Best to hammer those home. Especially in red states where people are starting to notice (see rural hospital closures).
I also don't think they should impeach Trump first. Go after Hegseth. RFK Jr. Tie it to competence and issues bothering the American people. Heck, there's things out there that Republicans enabled that are universally loathed. Flock cameras comes to mind. Start making criminal referrals for things that violated the law. And then when Trump pardons them or simply refuses to prosecute, remind people this why the administration's remaining enablers need to be booted.
There's a lot of material to work with. Given how exceptionally corrupt, criminal and anti-public interest this administration and their enablers have been. Doing so deftly, in a manner that keeps the public onboard for the next two years, is the real challenge. In a target rich environment, target selection and sequencing becomes a critical skill. Remains to be seen if Democrats can be that Machiavellian.
One last thing to keep in mind: 2028.
The GOP bench isn't deep. And their primaries will be dominated by the very base that just gave them this disaster.
The Democrats arguably have the widest bench in decades. But it remains to be seen where the base lies in this new configuration.
But after 4 years of Trump, 2 of which have Nosferatu Miller as his COS? Voters might end up electing a black Muslim trans sprinter who works at an abortion clinic. Miller isn't exactly known for compromises or his skill at handling the economic issues voters are concerned about.
The GOP bench isn't deep. And their primaries will be dominated by the very base that just gave them this disaster.
The Democrats arguably have the widest bench in decades. But it remains to be seen where the base lies in this new configuration.
But after 4 years of Trump, 2 of which have Nosferatu Miller as his COS? Voters might end up electing a black Muslim trans sprinter who works at an abortion clinic. Miller isn't exactly known for compromises or his skill at handling the economic issues voters are concerned about.
- Reaction score
- 8,879
- Points
- 1,360
#AmericanKadyrov
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 6,113
- Points
- 1,040
There is no such position as Press Secretary of the United States.
There is a position known as the White House Press Secretary, whose holder handles the day to day communications of the POTUS.
Six years in the job and he still can't get the basic vocab right!
There is a position known as the White House Press Secretary, whose holder handles the day to day communications of the POTUS.
Six years in the job and he still can't get the basic vocab right!
- Reaction score
- 7,565
- Points
- 1,160
I am convinced they cruise on by with their doors locked and windows rolled up. Earth is becoming a bad neighbourhood.
- Reaction score
- 12,423
- Points
- 1,040
Doesn't have to be if DeSantis throws in, and Rubio's a widely-mentioned contender whose only real exploitable weakness is his time with the Trump administration. The Democratic bench isn't deep either. Of the names I most commonly see, Ocasio-Cortez and Harris are intellectual lightweights and Newsom is too California for the rest of the country, and they've all had lots of national air time. Shapiro is the only consistently mentioned candidate who is comparable to DeSantis or Rubio, and most Americans probably haven't seen a lot of him yet. (Vance is a substantial cut below DeSantis, Shapiro, and Rubio.)
Strategically it's helpful if a leading candidate emerges quickly, which is easier if the pool is thin (vice "wide"). The fantasy some Democratic commentators talked up in 2016 was that Clinton should run practically unopposed except by one or two token candidates to occupy podiums at the debates, and spend most of her time in effect campaigning forward for the general election. Sanders spoiled that. (The Clinton establishment hated Sanders for that; after the party pulled a couple of slimey manoeuvres to shut out Sanders, the Sanders supporters hated the Clinton establishment right back, and it cost her votes.)
Wide (lots of candidates) isn't deep (lots of competent candidates). The Democrats had almost 30 people start for their 2020 primary. Very wide. The best they figured they could do was to recycle Joe Biden into the White House; Sanders was the last other candidate to exit. Not deep.
Generally any reasonable opposition party candidate has a good shot to win after two terms of the other party. Even a moderately unreasonable Democrat will most likely win after two terms of Trump. If anti-Jewish sentiment keeps Shapiro out and it comes down to Ocasio-Cortez, Harris, or Newsom, Democrats will be gambling (particularly if Harris is chosen). 2016 was supposed to be a sure thing. 2024 they stubbornly clung to one dead-end and then another, even as all the indicators were telling them no, no, no. Democrats are quite capable of selecting a weak candidate.
- Reaction score
- 19,395
- Points
- 1,160