They absolutely were not, unless you know so little about how the US government works that you think a 50-50 senate split and a 6-3 Republican majority supreme court counts as a trifecta?
Trifecta has nothing to do with the Supreme Court and it doesn’t matter the size of the majority (50(+1)-50 is still a majority) just that you have one in both houses.
Trifecta = 3 branches of government. Executive, Judicial, and Legislative. It makes no more sense to break Congress up into two branches than it would to break the Executive branch up by all KF the various agencies under the president.
It was the Supreme Court that decided to overturn Row vs Wade during Biden’s term. It was the Supreme Court that decided to strike down his executive order forgiving federal student loans. Essentially the same Supreme Court that decided to hand Trump a blank note saying “do what you want” stymied the Biden administration repeatedly.
Claiming that the majority in the Senate matters for anything other than the annual reconciliation bill shows how little you know about how the Senate works. A majority does not give effective control in either chamber, though the Democrats did have the numbers to control the House. Even the “50” you claim has to include independent senators who caucased with the Democrats, not actual registered Democrats, to get there.
So like, if you just want to spread Republican propaganda about how bad the Democrats are in an attempt to get their voters to stay home on election day, you can go ahead and say stuff like that. You’re spreading lies that help conservatives.
If you want to do an actual good-faith evaluation of when the Democrats have had the power necessary to do anything, you can look back through history and find that the only period of time they have had that control in the last 50 years was when they passed the ACA, and that was only for a few months, not a full two years.
I mean, your definition does make internal sense, but that’s not a government trifecta. You can start defining things whatever you want, but please don’t get mad at others when they don’t agree with your own made up definitions.
ACA was basically a Republican policy (its literally modeled after Romneycare) and was lobbied for by Insurance companies, so of course it got passed.
And, no, I’m not spreading “republican propaganda”. Both the democrats and republicans are incapable of governing because they’re uninterested in governing. But the democrats, unlike the republicans, can be reformed away from this. Lying about when they last held power won’t help reform them out of this situation. They constantly have the ball and then do nothing because their donors want nothing to get done.
Oh I think I recognize you from arguing on Reddit many years ago. Not many people would call the ACA a Republican bill- the Massachusetts bill it was based on was still substantially different, but was written and passed by a predominanly Democrat legislature and Romney got to put his name on it because he was governor, even after he failed to cut a lot of the parts he didn’t like because they were too nice to poor people. Its absolutely silly to call it Romneycare.
Liberal simps always like to bring up the fact that Democrats have almost never had a 60 vote majority in the Senate, saying that’s why Dems can’t do anything. Yet that never seems to be a barrier to Republicans.
Can you imagine a Democratic president threatening to cut off healthcare dollars to hospitals that don’t provide trans-affirming healthcare?
The reason you can’t is the problem with the Democratic party. Republicans are willing to use every scrap of authority they have. They find creative uses for using what procedural powers they have to accomplish incredible things with just the power of the executive branch. Democrats bitch that they can’t do anything unless they have 60 votes in the Senate. There’s always some other excuse for why they can’t get something done.
Can you imagine a Democratic president threatening to cut off healthcare dollars to hospitals that don’t provide trans-affirming healthcare?
Maybe they’re looking for measures that won’t harm all of the other people in said hospitals? How the fuck can anyone be stupid enough to think this is moral or viable policy.
More specifically, this does illustrate why Democrats lose. You need to think of it more as a protest or strike. Sometimes grinding a nation to a standstill is necessary to protect rights, freedoms, or human dignity. Minority groups often have to bring entire societies to their knees in order to have a hope of having their voices heard. Every strike. Every disruptive protest. All are designed to force the majority to stop ignoring the rights and needs of the minority. Sometimes the majority has to be harmed to protect the minority.
But to liberals like yourself, it’s completely unthinkable to you to risk harming the majority to protect the lives of minorities. But ultimately that’s what every protest movement has to do - it has to cause disruption. Republicans have no problem using the healthcare of the majority to hurt minorities. They know that people like yourself will go, “well, I’m not going to speak up, I’m not one of those people. I don’t care if they come for them first. I’m not one of them, greatest good for the greatest number. If the choice is that the hospital either stops offering healthcare to a demonized minority group or stop offering healthcare to everyone, I guess we’ll just have to stop offering healthcare to the demonized minority group.”
Biden could have said, “you know what? It’s our job to provide healthcare to all Americans. Trans people have to pay taxes just like anyone else. If your state is going to start taking away the healthcare from demonized minority groups, then no more federal healthcare dollars for your state. You can have federal dollars when you stop acting like filthy animals.”
We passed bills just fine for TWO HUNDRED YEARS before we ever made up this “filibuster avoidance” bullshit.
They call it the “nuclear option” for exactly this reason… weenies are scared to even discuss it. It’s not nuclear. Nothing blows up. It’s just a majority vote.
They put it to the side whenever they want, since it’s a simple parliamentary procedure. Hundreds of exceptions. Nothing blows up.
Put on your big boy pants and read about it, don’t be frightened
They absolutely were not, unless you know so little about how the US government works that you think a 50-50 senate split and a 6-3 Republican majority supreme court counts as a trifecta?
Trifecta has nothing to do with the Supreme Court and it doesn’t matter the size of the majority (50(+1)-50 is still a majority) just that you have one in both houses.
Trifecta = 3 branches of government. Executive, Judicial, and Legislative. It makes no more sense to break Congress up into two branches than it would to break the Executive branch up by all KF the various agencies under the president.
It was the Supreme Court that decided to overturn Row vs Wade during Biden’s term. It was the Supreme Court that decided to strike down his executive order forgiving federal student loans. Essentially the same Supreme Court that decided to hand Trump a blank note saying “do what you want” stymied the Biden administration repeatedly.
Claiming that the majority in the Senate matters for anything other than the annual reconciliation bill shows how little you know about how the Senate works. A majority does not give effective control in either chamber, though the Democrats did have the numbers to control the House. Even the “50” you claim has to include independent senators who caucased with the Democrats, not actual registered Democrats, to get there.
So like, if you just want to spread Republican propaganda about how bad the Democrats are in an attempt to get their voters to stay home on election day, you can go ahead and say stuff like that. You’re spreading lies that help conservatives.
If you want to do an actual good-faith evaluation of when the Democrats have had the power necessary to do anything, you can look back through history and find that the only period of time they have had that control in the last 50 years was when they passed the ACA, and that was only for a few months, not a full two years.
I mean, your definition does make internal sense, but that’s not a government trifecta. You can start defining things whatever you want, but please don’t get mad at others when they don’t agree with your own made up definitions.
ACA was basically a Republican policy (its literally modeled after Romneycare) and was lobbied for by Insurance companies, so of course it got passed.
And, no, I’m not spreading “republican propaganda”. Both the democrats and republicans are incapable of governing because they’re uninterested in governing. But the democrats, unlike the republicans, can be reformed away from this. Lying about when they last held power won’t help reform them out of this situation. They constantly have the ball and then do nothing because their donors want nothing to get done.
Oh I think I recognize you from arguing on Reddit many years ago. Not many people would call the ACA a Republican bill- the Massachusetts bill it was based on was still substantially different, but was written and passed by a predominanly Democrat legislature and Romney got to put his name on it because he was governor, even after he failed to cut a lot of the parts he didn’t like because they were too nice to poor people. Its absolutely silly to call it Romneycare.
Bud, you’re just wrong. It’s about having control of each step of the legislative process.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/117th_United_States_Congress
Yes, the 50-50 split SHOULD be a D majority, because VP can cast tie-breaker
There’s zero need for a super majority. They blow past that all of the time with simple majority vote. Called “nuclear option”.
Ah yes, the “nuclear option” certainly must be somethibg the government can casually undertake without consequence, right?
Just like how Lincoln lifting Habeus Corpus was a tool used for good and was never used for anything bad at any point by any future government?
Liberal simps always like to bring up the fact that Democrats have almost never had a 60 vote majority in the Senate, saying that’s why Dems can’t do anything. Yet that never seems to be a barrier to Republicans.
Can you imagine a Democratic president threatening to cut off healthcare dollars to hospitals that don’t provide trans-affirming healthcare?
The reason you can’t is the problem with the Democratic party. Republicans are willing to use every scrap of authority they have. They find creative uses for using what procedural powers they have to accomplish incredible things with just the power of the executive branch. Democrats bitch that they can’t do anything unless they have 60 votes in the Senate. There’s always some other excuse for why they can’t get something done.
Maybe they’re looking for measures that won’t harm all of the other people in said hospitals? How the fuck can anyone be stupid enough to think this is moral or viable policy.
More specifically, this does illustrate why Democrats lose. You need to think of it more as a protest or strike. Sometimes grinding a nation to a standstill is necessary to protect rights, freedoms, or human dignity. Minority groups often have to bring entire societies to their knees in order to have a hope of having their voices heard. Every strike. Every disruptive protest. All are designed to force the majority to stop ignoring the rights and needs of the minority. Sometimes the majority has to be harmed to protect the minority.
But to liberals like yourself, it’s completely unthinkable to you to risk harming the majority to protect the lives of minorities. But ultimately that’s what every protest movement has to do - it has to cause disruption. Republicans have no problem using the healthcare of the majority to hurt minorities. They know that people like yourself will go, “well, I’m not going to speak up, I’m not one of those people. I don’t care if they come for them first. I’m not one of them, greatest good for the greatest number. If the choice is that the hospital either stops offering healthcare to a demonized minority group or stop offering healthcare to everyone, I guess we’ll just have to stop offering healthcare to the demonized minority group.”
Biden could have said, “you know what? It’s our job to provide healthcare to all Americans. Trans people have to pay taxes just like anyone else. If your state is going to start taking away the healthcare from demonized minority groups, then no more federal healthcare dollars for your state. You can have federal dollars when you stop acting like filthy animals.”
That’s funny, Democrats won in 2020 without killing tens of thousands of innocent people in hospitals.
Killing non-trans people doesn’t help trans people. It’s fucking psychotic.
I don’t know. Ask a Republican.
You’re advocating doing the same thing, you fucking moron.
We passed bills just fine for TWO HUNDRED YEARS before we ever made up this “filibuster avoidance” bullshit.
They call it the “nuclear option” for exactly this reason… weenies are scared to even discuss it. It’s not nuclear. Nothing blows up. It’s just a majority vote.
They put it to the side whenever they want, since it’s a simple parliamentary procedure. Hundreds of exceptions. Nothing blows up.
Put on your big boy pants and read about it, don’t be frightened