Then fucking do it, and stop talking about doing it until you do it
this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
155 points (99.4% liked)
News
36993 readers
1836 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
He can't, as this is an ideological split between the parties and would need to go through the house as well, where it would fail. Bringing this up now helps inform voters of an issue that could be resolved if Democrats turn out and take control of the house while retaining control of the Senate and executive branch.
It’s more about getting the republicans on record with a vote on a clean bill. Hard to campaign when you voted no on voting rights.
Especially if it forces GOPers to vote against rape, viability and incest exceptions. Getting those fucks on record about that would be awesome.
.
Showing the Dems will actually do something would motivate the apathetic people. It isn't about swaying existing voters, it is about increasing the number of people who vote by giving them something to vote for.
.
It is about putting the GOP on the record to motivate the voters by taking some kind of action.
Try to keep up.
.
No, I think undecided or apathetic voters who are not currently engaged in voting will be motivated by the Dems actually doing something before the election and seeing the GOP obstruct it. More motivated than by Dems saying they will do something in the future, which they constantly fail to do.
Just fucking do something.
I speak from experience as an unaffiliated voter who votes against Republicans, but isn't really voting for Dems because I think they will do anything. Just because it is the best chance to make the GOP lose.
.
Didn't know I needed a thesis to have an opinion.
.
If if if if if if.
I don't buy for a second that he will ditch the filibuster if the Dems have control. They could get rid of it right now and they would be no worse off than when the Republicans have the house, senate, and oval office and choose to ditch it to pass their project 2025 bullshit like they neutered it to stack the courts.
Ditching the filibuster, passing the legislation, and then blaming the house for not following through should dominate the election discussion.
You don't have to get rid of the filibuster. You only have to get rid of the procedural filibuster. Make 'em stand and talk.
Maybe keeping people in office till they’re 80 and 90+ would be less appealing if they had to stay in session for a real physical filibuster?
Strom Thurmond was already 53 when he did his 24-hour filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. I'm convinced he still could've done it at 100 years old when he left office fueled by nothing but hate.
The majority already has the power to "make em stand and talk". They generally choose not to in order to avoid wasting everyone's time.