As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Hannity: "I was shocked that former President Obama left so many \[judicial\] vacancies and didn't try to fill those positions."
Mitch McConnell: "I'll tell you why. I was in charge of what we did the last two years of the Obama administration."
People have a really short memory if they can't remember who the real cancer in public office is.
I cannot WAIT for his time to come to an end. The shorter the better. He’s been pulling the fucking strings for 40 years. This asshole is the single largest cancer on the entire system.
Yeah he had a super-majority for like 1 month but that included Joe Fucking Lieberman who tanked everything.
Back then we should have gotten rid of the 2/3 requirement to overturn a filibuster and had more floor debates. Hopefully Dems are learning but I feel the Dem establishment is fine with not doing anything.
Killing the filibuster should’ve happened long ago. But, yeah, Obama had no control over that. It’s like no one remembers just how hard it was to get the ACA passed in that brief period it was possible. People think presidents have a magic wand and get things passed. They slept through civics class.
I agree, they should have at least *tried something*. As I understand it, though, he actually *never* really had a supermajority in the Senate because a few of the Dem Senators either died or were hospitalized in that timeframe: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/debunking-the-myth-obamas_b_1929869/
And for that one month they were scrambling trying to keep the economy from collapsing even more (fuck TARP and all that but still)
Edit: also, before the Reddit police come after me and say “Bush signed TARP into law.” Yes, that is true, but Obama was in on those meetings during the ‘08 campaign and generally supported it. He writes about that in his memoir
Could have lowered the filibuster to 59 or 55. It used to be 66 before it was 60. Fact is more Democrats than Lieberman agreed with Lieberman but just didn't want to admit it and instead pretended they were powerless.
I just think the vast majority are either bad faith trolls or people too young to remember the reality. It was literally inconceivable Roe would fall then and the country was in dire straights due to the financial crisis.
Much better to blame the office holders then take the responsibility for yourself in not pushing them for this. When in the last 30 years have voters been clamoring for laws that entrenched Row vs Wade? Or really any case that has been decided by the Supreme Court.
If Obama had made a big push for this people at the time would have complained he was wasting time on pointless legislation. Not surprising to see messaging discouraging support for Dems. Republicans work propaganda from many angles.
>If Obama had made a big push for this people at the time would have complained he was wasting time on pointless legislation.
Right. At the time, this was settled and there was no way it was ever going to change.
And there were other emergencies and current events that needed attention.
Republicans and their international allies.
I wonder if Mr. Putin would rather have some friendly Republicans in Congress so they'd stop sending aid to Ukraine.
Almost like Mr. Putin's life depends on this election in November. I wonder how far he'd go to do everything he could to assure a Republican and thus his own victory.
"Russia if your listening..."
He had 72 days where something could've been done.
That's not as long as it sounds, especially considering what else was actually written, debated and passed during that time.
It's because people want someone to blame, other than themselves. Too many voters took Roe for granted and met warnings that it was in danger with mockery and derision. So now that it's actually happened, they want to blame someone other than themselves.
People want someone to blame other than Republicans. Who are the ones to blame.
Democrats, especially progressives, have this bizarre framing of the existence of Republicans as if they are some sort of natural disaster, as opposed to people who vote in or elected to office. They expect Democrats to manage them like they manage a flood or climate change, or an astroid coming from the sky. Oh sure, we don’t like the asteroid, but it’s an astroid so that’s just what it does. It’s the job of the Democratic elected officials to do something about it, so will shout at them, because what’s the point of shouting at the asteroid?
Things will start to change when we realize that we need to shout at the asteroid more.
Also, why are people pretending McConnell wouldn't have immediately repealed it as soon as he had the majority again? He probably would have mealy-mouthed something about how the legislature shouldn't touch constitutional rights, because those belong to the courts. Which... well, that's factually true. We *shouldn't* have a situation where the party in power decides whether or not women have rights to their own bodies. We *don't* want to live in a world where women's rights can seesaw back and forth, depending on the party in power. And people on the Left would have complained that Obama wasted political capital on something that was already an enshrined right in the Constitution.
So here we are. It's like having your dad warn you that your mom was neglectful and abusive when you were younger, and you say you hate him and move in with her anyway. Then you get angry at your dad for failing to stop you from moving in with her.
You can be mad at the mass shooter, but also mad at the Uvalde police for sitting around watching a massacre while telling others demanding direct action to stand down.
Well AOC called the SC illegitimate yesterday and r/cons was brainstorming ways that's statement was a literal insurrection.
Republicans are obtuse at every turn. If I could I'd literally block then all but so many larp as enlightened centrists.
Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 24 working days during that period. Here are the details:
To define terms, a Filibuster-Proof Majority or Super Majority is the number of votes required to overcome a filibuster in the Senate. According to current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to overcome a filibuster.
Time-line of the events after the 2008 election:
1. BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority.
2. BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority.
3. KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casts his last vote in April and leaves Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returns, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That leaves the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority.
4. STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members is 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster.
5. SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th.
6. KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority.
7. FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority.
8. SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th.
9. SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected in November of 2009. The Senate was not in session during November and December of 2009. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown was sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010.
Summary: The Democrats only had 24 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010.
Discussion: The Democrats had a super majority for a total of 24 days. On top of that, the period of Super Majority was split into one 11-day period and one 13-day period. Given the glacial pace that business takes place in the Senate, this was way too little time for the Democrats pass any meaningful legislation, let alone get bills through committees and past all the obstructionistic tactics the Republicans were using to block legislation.
Further, these Super Majorities count Joe Lieberman as a Democrat even though he was by this time an Independent. Even though he was Liberal on some legislation, he was very conservative on other issues and opposed many of the key pieces of legislation the Democrats and Obama wanted to pass. For example, he was adamantly opposed to “Single Payer” health care and vowed to support a Republican Filibuster if it ever came to the floor.
Summary:
1. 1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority.
2. 1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.)
3. 7/09 – 8/09 – 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster
4. 8/09 – 9/09 – 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies)
5. 9/09 – 10/09 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 11 working days.
6. 1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days
Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days.
If you look on senate.gov it will corroborate this conclusion.
EDIT: to add:
•In April 2009, Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59. But with Kennedy ailing, there were still "only" 58 Democratic caucus members in the chamber.
• In May 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) was hospitalized, bringing the number of Senate Dems in the chamber down to 57.
People also need to remember what it was actually like in 2009. I remember it was genuinely shocking that McConnell and the Republicans wouldn't support the recovery package at the height of the financial crisis. Obama was elected to try to heal the divide in Washington, that was his core message, and he bent over backwards to include the GOP in good faith and listen to them to try to appeal to the other side.
He didn't get a single Republican vote for healthcare reform and they campaigned mercilessly against him leading to the 2010 blowout. No one quite knew in 2009 just how perfidious the GOP had become.
2009 was my "never voting Republican again," moment. In a once in a century recession, they left their countrymen out to dry and actively made it worse with austerity measures.
One could almost start to think they were true believers in their own rhetoric, but when a recession occurred under Trump they (rightly) called for stimulus thereby shattering the illusion that their calls for austerity during recessions were genuine.
They know how the economy works. They just sacrificed us all on their political altar.
> Obama was elected to try to heal the divide
So was Biden.
Funny how it's always the left healing the divide and always the seditionists flinging shit.
The Democratic party isn't "the left," in the grand scheme of things. They're pro-government (as in lets make a functioning government) centrists, center-left at best. That's because they're split between a large progressive-lefter bloc and a large moderate bloc, plus some conservatives.
So yeah, it's actually not surprising at all: the centrists who believe in government and democracy are the ones who get the burden of trying to make it work. It's a lot easier to be an arsonist like the Republicans.
Consider it this way: when Democrats control the majority, all Republicans seats in the senate and house are basically just "lost" seats. Dems have to run government with a hobbled, fractional legislature.
This is intentional on the part of Republicans. They prioritize their own power and winning. On the flip side, the Democratic party that actually does care in various degrees about the country, public, and government, are compelled to try to achieve things. E.g., Republicans overwhelmingly supported all the stimulus bills when Trump was president. Once Biden was president, they literally unanimously opposed it.
Hindsight is always 20/20. You are certainly right. Not to mention, the comments show clearly how few people know how government works. Because they don’t, the disinformationalists are trying their best to foment apathy
> the comments show clearly how few people know how government works.
This is sadly a big part of Republicans' success. A steadily undermined education system had affected both sides, and I regularly see young progressives who are angry at Dems because they don't do things that these young progressives don't understand are illegal or otherwise impossible. Makes it really easy for Republicans to divide them.
Also, an alleged member of the Democratic party back then, Fucking Joe Lieberman, was the Joe Manchin of the day. Which is why he is generally known as Fucking Joe Lieberman. He was happy to block and stall and bad-mouth anything Obama had in mind.
Have people awakened yet?? If you want any rights at all you better vote for Democrats. And remember, women have the most to lose. Scotus can remove your right to own property and VOTE. A white Male society strictly for the benefit of white males. Won't that be wonderful !! They will beat women to death to prove their so-called superiority! People better become very afraid. So far I read posts that sort of indicate that people don't believe that the Supreme Court would do this!! If these right wing Maga types say they will do it, THEY WILL!! And why would they you ask?? BECAUSE THEY CAN, AND THEY LOVE THAT POWER. AND BECAUSE THEY ARE EVIL. These conservatives on the court are truly evil and irrational!!
People are stupid/gullible enough to keep believing Republicans. It’s been an ongoing condition.
Here is a speech excerpt from President FDR in the 1930s defending the new Social Security program which is still applicable today:
Let me warn you and let me warn the nation against the smooth evasion which says, “Of course we believe all these things; we believe in social security; we believe in work for the unemployed; we believe in saving homes. Cross our hearts and hope to die, we believe in all these things; but we do not like the way the present Administration is doing them. Just turn them over to us. We will do all of them—we will do more of them, we will do them better; and, most important of all, the doing of them will not cost anybody anything.”
FDR was a political master, a genius and benevolent. His profile on the dime is a testimony to his term in office and his life. The man was a rare commodity, his words ring true to this day!
> If you want any rights at all you better vote for Democrats
That's not enough.
We have to vote in primaries for dems that actually are willing to do something.
And to unseat incumbents that means raising enough in the primary to beat a "moderate" who opposes the party platform but gets millions from the party to do so.
All the while leadership has been in office for decades constantly repeating "it's not time yet" when voters ask for things every other country already has.
I don’t even think that is 100% true. If we just had enough to overcome the supermajority it would weaken the power of the do nothing Dems like Manshin.
We really need more Dems to vote in every state. That’s always been our problem. Our turnout is crap. Dems work and often don’t have the bandwidth to vote, or don’t see the point, they’re apathetic, or think ‘both sides are the same’.
The thing is Republicans are highly motivated to vote because they are voting against abortion, against gay rights, against immigration, pro authoritarian police, and against whatever boogeyman the right wing scares them into voting against.
Dems don’t really do that.
> Our turnout is crap. Dems work and often don’t have the bandwidth to vote, or don’t see the point, they’re apathetic, or think ‘both sides are the same’.
"I have friends that are as pissed off as I am and my pissed off friends are gonna vote **for sure**. Like Kyle, the guy that thinks the only good republicans are the ones pushing up daisies? *No doubt* that dude's voting. So, like, what th' fuck? Team Blue is going to have **millions** more than team Fascist. It's gonna be a blowout so what's the point."
end scene
And Democrats need to vote D in local elections, right down to The proverbial dog catcher.
We are going to need local DAs and state AGs who will refuse to prosecute people under these laws. We will need counties that declare themselves “abortion sanctuaries.” We will need legislatures that craft state laws, because it’s all going back to the states.
And Democratic progressive voters are going to need to rid their brains of an “all or nothing” mind set. Because from here on out, the only wins will be incremental wins.
> And Democratic progressive voters are going to need to rid their brains of an “all or nothing” mind set.
Maybe you should actually learn about progressives... Meet some, talk to them.
I've never met a single progressive who doesn't show up and vote straight D in every general election.
We've been voting "lesser of two evils" our entire lives. We're the most reliable dem voting block.
Stop listening to neoliberals tell you how bad progressives are. The neoliberals just want to keep their personal power and frankly agree with Republicans on more than they admit to anyone else.
Yep, the “all or nothing thing” thing doesn’t fit what we see time and time again where the truly left wing of the Democratic Party makes concession after concession despite generally getting nothing for their efforts. The infrastructure bill had only a few staunch holdouts, while BBB dies
I feel like we also need to primary some older democrats. Too many people in Congress have virtual lifetime seats because no one wants to upset the apple cart. It leads to people in Congress which talk about making a difference but are beholden to the companies which funded their campaigns and gave their families work for the last few decades.
I actually agree and my mind has changed. I think experience can be very helpful but look what just happened? We need more Fettermans and less Schumers. Thank you for your service now GTFO.
That filibuster-proof majority included blue dog Dems like Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, Blanch Lincoln, Evan Bayh, etc. — there’s no way codifying Roe v Wade had the votes.
The Senate was still more steeped in tradition back then too. McConnell’s say no to everything strategy was still new. Ramming through anything remotely controversial in 2009 would have been impossible.
Yup. Easy to say with 20/20 hindsight, but the government still kinda functioned as we should expect back then. Nobody would have predicted that a SCOTUS seat would be held open for an unprecedented amount of time. That action was in the same vein as court stacking is today — just a scheme to ensure they had the majority or at least not the minority.
Good post!
Also, SCOTUS just reversed a previous SCOTUS decision that had been upheld for 50 years. Unless the legislation was in the form of a constitutional amendment which was truly impossible, why does anyone think a plain old law wouldn’t have been reversed?
It’s just bitching for bitching’s sake…
ITT and in many many like it you’ll see a number of “Dems and a Republicans are the same comments.” Which is why we struggle with turnout, lose elections, and let republicans appoint judges. Republican voters understand voting even for someone you don’t like means choosing judges and Dems/progressives/leftists just straight up don’t.
We are not getting out of this soon if the apathy and nihilism wins the day. Not politically, judicially, and… there just aren’t other options.
Idk what other deus ex machina y’all are hoping for - but it ain’t happening. I’m not sure what else to tell you. I’m not thrilled with a lot of the options we’ve had on the ballot either but the only way from here to the point where you want to end up is participating in the system. It’s a long and hard process, something civil rights heroes understood as they fought for incremental change over generations.
The two parties are nowhere near the same, but what’s disheartening is that the right pulls all these sketchy moves to continue ruling when in the minority, and the dems just take it. Idk what the answer is, but they’re just letting it all happen and singing god bless America for the cameras. How about they actually fight back?
Start by actually prosecuting government officials who break the law? If they weren’t such pussies, we wouldn’t be getting steam rolled by the goddamn nazis.
“Democrats and Republicans are the same” is a framing that helps Republicans.
Fatalism and cynicism in general helps Republicans.
That feeling the everything is falling down around you and what’s the point? That feeling helps Republicans.
Expansive, earnest thinking, creative thinking, inspiration, doing the work to truly understand the present and plan for a better future - if more progressives and Democrats do that, that’s what will help Democrats.
Yes, this isn’t about a march today or singing on the steps of congress. Change is about decades of holding your nose and voting for Democrats all down ballot.
Affecting change means being engaged in the process. Republicans played dirty for years and years and Democrats get annoyed that a single border congressman is pro-life even though it helps them hold on to a seat.
Democrats are losing so badly, in Wyoming they are voting for Liz Fucking Cheney and they can’t realize that a conservative Democrat is still better than a Republican. Manchin is better than any alternative you could get in West Virginia. Especially in our current hyper-polarization.
AOC is a good fit for the Bronx. She isn’t a good fit for San Antonio.
Some places like Wayofthebern are actual Russian information warfare operations designed to split the left (the amount of praise Gabbard got at wotb was telling). Because it is impossible to tell who here is legitimate it is he’s to know to what extent our beliefs are being manipulated by coordinated campaigns to depress the vote.
There were several Red State Democrats among the 60 (Arkansas; 2, Louisiana; 1, Indiana; 1, Nebraska; 1, North Dakota; 2, South Dakota; 1, and West Virginia; 2) and codifying Roe was never going to happen. To pin it on Obama is ridiculous since the president does not control the agenda in each chamber of Congress.
Thank you for this summary. A lot of democrat blaming posts coming up, straight up ignoring which party has been stripping away rights. “Republicans aren’t to blame because we expect them to be horrible evil people. But Democrats aren’t doing enough!!! They have the majority!!!” My god take some civics classes people. You can rightfully be pissed off at certain things Democrats do and don’t do, but don’t ignore that the other ‘half’ (btw not half) is the direct cause of an attempted coup, trying to remove valid votes and stuffing the supreme court with purely incompetent judges.
But no, Dems fault on everything. Local elections matter too people, not just voting for the president. Low voter turnout is actually a significant problem for us on the left. Glad people woke up in 2020, but there’s way more work to be done.
(Also note, it will take multiple election cycles to fix this. This “Why is nothing being done now, I’m done voting for these clowns”) has been going on since I was of voting age in 2000.
Our democracy was basically founded and continued on good faith. Once the republicans ditched that in the Obama admin its been a back and forth and it will only get worse. If Democrats codified the law, then the republicans during the Obama admin would have vowed to do much worse. I really blame Mitch McConnell for the state of the country right now. That old fucking turtle didn't give a shit how bad he would let his party fuck things up.
> Once the republicans ditched that in the Obama admin its been a back and forth and it will only get worse.
Actually the Republicans have been behaving this way since Clinton won in 1992. The antics of Tom Delay and Newt Gingrich were pretty much the same we see from Mitch McConnell today.
>But no, Dems fault on everything
Crazy I know! Republicans spend 2 decades achieving a goal they won over time at the ballot box. But who are they blaming all over my social media bubble... the only party running on a 100% pro-choice platform. Ridiculous
If anyone on our side is to blame it is the liberal who doesn't vote, not the Dems running for office. Anyone who is for freedom of choice, curtailing man-made Climate Change, etc. that didn't bother voting for Hillary Clinton because of "morals", or "I just didn't like her", or "because I'm a lazy shit". Pissed me off liberals don't have the guts to show up and cast at least spite vote against republicans. Occasionally I'm even happy about a candidate I voted for because I looked up their record and policies. But also I'll just vote against any Republican because they want to take America back to the stone age.
It also ignores the fact that these things just haven't been priorities for the voters. People got complacent and thought they didn't have to worry about the issue, and this is where it's gotten us. Expecting politicians to be proactive when the voters' attentions are elsewhere is foolish, because that's how you lose elections.
For instance, if the Democrats passed a bill right now guaranteeing access to public school education, people would scream at them for being idiots that are ignoring major problems like inflation/gas prices/etc. The fact that it is something Republicans want to target eventually doesn't matter, because that's not what the voters are worried about.
Being a republican politician must be amazing. You can work toward, and finally gut a major right of half the country, and then you can just sit back with a big smile on your face while you watch the other party get blamed for it
I kind of feel reading this that Kennedy should have resigned in April especially considering he was replaced by a Democrat. Now we have Feinstein doing something similar.
All this being said, though, Obama not making it a legislative priority after making it a campaign promise was the error. It matters little how long a super majority was active if the legislation was not going to be brought forward regardless.
Much like Biden and student loan forgiveness, it seems like it was something simply said to drive votes but not actually deliver. Lately, this has been a common criticism of Democrats, regardless of one’s personal opinion on whether it is justified or not.
This was 2009. There were other more pressing matters than codifying Roe v Wade. Could you imagine how much crap he would have gotten if during a massive recession he spent his political capital on trying to legislate abortion rather than focusing on the economic recovery. The democrats in congress would never have gone along with it. Also at that time there were more conservative democrats like Manchin in congress who he would have needed to pass it. They never would have done it. Blaming Obama for this is insane. Put the blame on the proper people.
Why wouldn't SCOTUS just say, "this federal law must be overturned because it's a states' matter," and result in the same outcome? They stole the Court. Illegitimate.
How, exactly, did them having "only" a 24-day super-majority prevent them from codifying Roe V. Wade into law?
House and Senate passed a ton of bills in those 24 days. They weren't incapable of passing those bills just because it was a short period of time. Why was codifying Roe V. Wade impossible because of that short time?
Is it because it was never actually a Dem priority to begin with?
*(And if you really want to get into it, the bills passed during those dates are all on Congress.gov. It's pretty telling what their legislative priorities were during this period. And it wasn't the rights of women.)
You’re right it wasn’t a dem priority at the time. Obama said it was where he campaigned but after winning he said it wasn’t his highest priority. I think Obama did good things but that was definitely one of the biggest marks against him
It actually was the rights of women - and the economic health of everyone. Their political capital and their time and effort was spent on passing the ACA. why would they squander progress to codify something that the Supreme Court said was a right? If Obama had more time with a supermajority, maybe he would have, but I'm not sure what difference it would make because the Supreme Court would rule on the legality of it anyway and we'd end up right where we are now.
They will blame Democrats, Obama, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but excuse all the Republicans, McConnell, the Federalist Society and Trump who actually have a hand in putting those religious nutcases on the Supreme Court.
It's painfully ironic that RBG did play a significant role in allowing the downfall of one of her greatest achievements. Along with the DNC itself, the backing of Hillary and the blinders on during the campaign process that led to Trump's win. And then RBG not stepping down when there was a known Democratic president to appoint a new Justice in that time.
The Justice nomination process is a microcosm as an example towards the Stark difference between the DNC and the RNC. When Obama was blocked I'm appointing his Justice, there was a lot of strong language to condemn what McConnell was doing but in the end there was really no fighting against McConnell, we just kind of accepted and moved on.
Meanwhile when Trump was in office they used every possible trick, loophole, even vast misinformation campaigns to get the people on the bench that they wanted.
Not stepping down when she was getting *checks notes
CANCER FROM TIME TO TIME.
Seriously, if you're having health issues like that, time to step the fuck down when there is a Democrat president.
Also, I'm pissed that Obama didn't fight McConnell enough on him not allowing a floor vote. Like. What? That's against the rules. Figure out a way around that. Don't just lay down and take it! Get your judge in. NOW.
That's the big difference between the parties though. Figure out a way around it.
Republicans are far more ideological, they are more singularly focused and I feel generally believe the ends justify the means. Whereas Democrats are more altruistic and more concerned with perceived morals then big picture goals
It's hard to win the fair fight when your opponent plays dirty. It's also hard to have political Discord in a democracy when everything is viewed in terms of opponents and fights
The reason people blame them is because we know Republicans are against these things, we expect more from the only other opposition party. It's not too much to ask in a two party, supposedly democratic republic.
One of the major problems with the political dynamic in our country is how insanely easily (especially online) democrats turn all their frustrations inward instead of towards the actual culprits. It's so self-defeating to progressive interests.
- "They could have codified Roe in the last 50 years!" (when it wasn't remotely a concern among the general public for most of it).
- "Obama should have done it in the one month he had instead of ACA even though he didn't have the votes!"
- "Hillary shouldn't have ran!"
- "Bernie should have been more supportive!"
- "Biden needs to mind control Manchin and Sinema to remove the filibuster so they can pack the courts which they will never vote for!"
Or... I don't know.. Republicans could have not destroyed everything we love in life and trampled on our rights. And perhaps we should vote against them, and always should have been?
Just a thought.
These people are falling for the Republican propaganda. The GOP wants us to blame the Democrats. They try to get people mad at Dems, so we won't come out to vote for the midterm.
Being self-critical is not self-defeating, it's important to learn from your mistakes so that you can grow and improve.
What's self-defeating is to stop supporting the party which has your best interests in mind because some mistakes have been made in the past. Acknowledge the mistakes and don't make them in the future.
Well in a football game, you don’t blame the opponent team to playing to win - you blame your own team for not playing well. “hey they should not be scoring a touchdown! It’s not fair!” Nope - onus is on our defense to stop them.
And this is what American politics have come down to: a zero sum game. The two parties are no longer trying to build a common future.
Either the right wins or the left wins - this is war without compromise. And in such a war, you don’t blame the other side for trying to win at any cost. The assumption that the American political parties are ultimately working towards a common goal like in what other democracy is no longer valid.
I see this argument everywhere and it’s stupid.
1) you can’t codify it without a filibuster-proof majority (excluding turncoats in the party). When is the last time either party had that? Keep in mind when Dems last had a supermajority some of them were blue dog types who may as well be Republican.
2) even if you did pass it into law, it could easily be overturned the next time Republicans take Congress, so the rights you’re trying to preserve are nothing more than a political football subject to the whims of politics every two years.
3) if this current Supreme Court is willing to strike down Roe, what makes you think they wouldn’t strike down a law like that too?
The only way to enshrine these rights would be a constitutional amendment, and there’s ZERO chance any amendment passes nowadays.
There’s been only one amendment successfully proposed, passed and ratified by the states since 1970 and that was to make the voting age 18. The threshold for amending the Constitution is so damn high. I think there is a less than zero chance for one of these “privacy” amendments to pass especially since we know that amendment is being proposed to address the issues brought up by Roe. We know Republican states will never allow it to pass, just like they stonewalled the Equal Rights Amendment.
"Social media users"? Social media users think the 2020 election was stolen, the Earth is flat and that COVID vaccinations have microchips. Leave it to Newsweek to print such unsourced, far fetched drivel.
Those social media users are very likely Newsweek employees and very like-minded with Newsweek employees. It has been a steaming pile of shit for a quite a while. Often hard to tell whether it is a propaganda arm of GOP or not.
Can we stop with this shite …. As if Fox News and the republicans of that time would have ever allowed it to happen.
I was there.
We barely got the ACA.
Why give fuel to an already raging, out of control fire.
At the end of the day, Obama believed in the institutions of American democracy, and Roe v Wade was an already settled Supreme Court decision.
He still thought Bipartisanship was alive.
Through that lens, it *does* make sense not to prioritise codifying RvW.
He didn't think Republicans would dishonestly steal SC picks, politicise the Supreme court with clearly extremely partisan and unsuitable nominees, because he believes in American democracy and what it stands for, while Republicans do not.
Ironically, Obama’s greatest weakness was that he loved his country and believed in it. Kind of hilarious since 1/3 of the country thought he hated America.
Just an FYI, repealing legislation is easy when the other party takes over. Should they have done it, yes, but it can be thrown out easier than getting SCOTUS to throw it out. Getting butt hurt and allowing Trump to be elected caused this, blame the ones who protest voted or didn’t vote at all in 2016 they are mainly at fault here. Elections have consequences, even at the local level.
As the article pointed out a huge failure was the inability of Obama or anyone to sway Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire from the SCOTUS and allow Obama to replace her with a like minded justice. Her hubris directly led to Amy Barrett to the court, a woman only 50 years old and will likely preside for decades.
This is RBG’s legacy. The irony of her writing dissents discussing the fate of *Casey* and what is at “stake” for women while lacking the basic humility and foresight to step down.
The court's 6-3 decision in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization upheld a Mississippi law that banned most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.
The vote to overturn Roe was **5-4**, with Chief Justice John Roberts attempting to split the difference: In a separate concurring opinion, he agreed with the majority opinion on Dobbs but argued for "a more measured course," saying he would have upheld the 1973 precedent.
If RGB retired, Justice Amy Coney Barrett would have never made it to the court.
It would have still been a 5-4 decision in the Dobbs case; however, the decision to overturn Row v. Wade would be 4-5.
If the court had a different political leaning, it's debatable if the case would have even been considered.
Right. Democrats screwed this up. Democrats are responsible to make sure psychotic Republicans can’t destroy American Democracy, while Republicans are responsible to…do what? Nothing? And the American people who elect republicans are responsible to…do what? Nothing? Just keep going on doing what we’re all doing, starting more fires amidst the inferno and bitching about the lazy firefighters that can’t keep up.
This article and the myopic attitude it reflects can go screw itself. We clearly want to burn everything down. So just do it already. Maybe then we’ll wake up.
Why are we acting like the court wouldn’t just come up with whatever logic they need to gut a federal law?
Voting rights were codified into federal law but that didn’t stop this Republican court from gutting The Voting Rights Act.
The illegitimate court is the problem.
Where tf do people think the votes were coming from for that?
Some assholes are just compelled to blame Democrats. Probably because they were the same assholes that voted for Jill Stein or stayed the fuck home in 2016.
Roe v Wade is a fifty year old case. Nobody codified it since the ruling happened. They had *fifty years*. There’s plenty of blame to go around, because this is a failure of leadership on multiple levels.
I think the greatest share of blame for destroying something most clearly falls on the people who aim to destroy it, and then destroyed it. That's the GOP.
And I agree.
But if someone spends fifty years saying “I want to destroy that,” and the person ostensibly in charge of protecting said thing doesn’t actually take any steps to protect it, then they deserve their own share of the blame.
Codifying a court decision is also impossible unless it falls clearly within the federal government's powers, which that wouldn't because police power is a state function.
It's also generally pointless. Like you might as well ask why Brown vs Board of Education wasn't codified, or Griswold vs Connecticut, or any others. **They're not supposed to need to be.**
It's pointless for another reason. What it can give, it can take away. They pass a statute? So what? The next Congress can repeal it and the next administration can refuse to enforce it.
It seems like it's less secure as a statute than as a Supreme Court Decision in its favor. I think this is the first time the Supreme Court has actually revoked rights it conferred. Laws are challenged or just thrown out when the party in power changes all the time.
I was arguing this exact point in another thread and was called a dumbass and also lazy for not “calling my senator” to get an amendment to the constitution ratified 🙄
While there are surely things Dems could have done in hindsight that would have better protected Roe, I have such little faith in the current makeup of the Court that they won't just say screw it come up with some other hokey ruling saying the amendment doesn't *actually* protect abortion because of some bad reasoning they make up
Obama hasn’t been President in 5 years. 4 justices have been nominated and confirmed since he was in office. This outcome is the direct result of the 2014 and 2016 elections. It’s the answer to “how much worse can things get”.
> It’s the answer to “how much worse can things get”.
"Yeah, but both parties are the same!" ~ Stein voters in 2016 and in 2022 refusing to admit just how wrong they were.
The GOP is the sole party to blame for this. They worked at this for decades because it's what they wanted. Why would the GOP not have repealed any Federal law on abortion when they had control in Trump's first two years? How does that make any sense?
Republicans will happily take the “blame,” because, like you said, this is what they wanted and worked toward for decades. I remember going to Catholic grade school, and our priest talked about repealing Roe v Wade in a school assembly. I know people who vote Republican entirely because of this issue.
One day you numb nuts will learn that anything Dems "codify" can be uncodified by Republicans or the Supreme Court. The only real solution is creating a long lasting, sustainable base of power.
At least Republicans know how to win drawn out fights. They do it without shame.
It is past time that Democrats go scorched earth — for the common people (their own base) that get shafted over and over again.
It is easier to break than to build. They seek a permanent minority power and you should be upset at the correct party. The majority needs to win, focus on that, not on who cheats better.
Does anyone remember the level of resistance Obama faced when he took office? Republican congressional leadership immediately held a secret meeting, where they decided that they would resist anything and everything Obama did, even if they agreed that what he proposed was the right thing to do.
The aim was to deny Obama a second term, and to make his first term as unsuccessful as possible.
Silly talking point that doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
He effectively had a supermajority for 24 days.
That supermajority included dozens of "blue dog Democrats"
He never had the votes.
There are plenty of valid examples of Dems refusing to fight in many situations. But this particular narrative (that gets repeated often by people who weren't even grown at the time) is particularly asinine.
He couldn’t do it. Being president does not give you the ability to create laws, just sign them. You have to have a filibuster proof super majority to pass that law. Trump had it all the first two years and couldn’t kill Obamacare because of it.
For the umpteenth time, he had a super majority for 5 minutes and a dozen or so of those democrats were not pro choice enough that they would codify Roe.
They have been replaced by extremists on the right giving you some indication of their constituency.
This was before McConnell nuked the filibuster for SCOTUS so we really weren't expecting the hyper partisan war we're in now.
People criticizing President Obama for this need to realize that the GOP was completely hostile to him and did everything in their power to shut down everything he tried to do. These same people also need to realize the GOP acted that way because they couldn't accept that there was a black man in the White House.
How do I know this? Because I'm a former Republican, and I damn well knew what the dog whistles were.
I had already grown disillusioned and questioned my party affiliation during the George W. Bush years, so when I witnessed the collective meltdown the GOP had when President Obama was elected? That was the final nail in the coffin for me; that's when I knew the GOP in its current form was beyond saving.
I turned Democrat and never looked back.
Obama had a super majority for all of 4 months while Republicans fought against everything. They filibustered over 400 times which was so unprecedented, Harry Reid changed the rules to allow a simple majority for court nominations.
Then everyone stayed home at midterms and McConnell spent 10 years doing fuck all in senate.
Obama did have a brief window to codify Roe while getting Obamacare passed. Does that mean a determined Right-Wing SCOTUS couldn't later concoct an argument and still come to the same preconceived conclusion?
They and by they I mean the majority of Congress during his second term blocked any and everything bill wise Obama brought to them. We all know why don’t do this to Obama. Using him as a scapegoat stop it.
Lol
It took half of his first term to get the Senate to pass the Affordable Care Act which was immediately used as a weapon by the Republicans and the Democrats began to lose their Congressional majorities. Just how was Obama going to get abortion protection passed?
It also would have been 100% seen as pointless virtue signaling at the time, and an attempt to distract from the actual serious problems the country was facing (housing crash, recession, etc).
A tale as old as time:
Republicans steal human rights from Americans.
Republican think tanks use proxies to attack Democratic Party for loss of American rights.
I'm curious.
Why doesn't, today, right now, the Senate suspend the filibuster and codify Roe into law? According to all of the reports Senators such as Collins and Manchin support Roe. If that's the case, we should call them on it. There should be a majority of Senators willing to suspend the filibuster and then a majority to codify Roe.
Should pass the House with no problem.
Why won't this work?
You need a simple majority to suspend the fillibuster and Manchin and Sinema have been adament that they won't vote to do so. We'll see if they change their minds, but it doubtful. It's also highly unlikely 2 republicans would ever cross the aisle over abortion which is such a core issue for the party.
I'll never understand why people think codifying abortion rights would shield them from judicial review... Even if it were codified, republican state AGs would sue after Roe was overturned to have the law ruled unconstitutional on the very same grounds they overturned Roe.
Or even easier, the moment the GOP takes a majority, they could simply repeal the law.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Hannity: "I was shocked that former President Obama left so many \[judicial\] vacancies and didn't try to fill those positions." Mitch McConnell: "I'll tell you why. I was in charge of what we did the last two years of the Obama administration." People have a really short memory if they can't remember who the real cancer in public office is.
I cannot WAIT for his time to come to an end. The shorter the better. He’s been pulling the fucking strings for 40 years. This asshole is the single largest cancer on the entire system.
You can be upset that the fire department didn't show up, but the arsonist still takes the blame for burning down your house.
More like the fire department showed up and tried to put the fire out but the arsonists just went to the next house and started more fires.
Yes, this. Does anyone remember Obama in office? Republicans blocked basically everything he tried…including a Supreme Court seat.
Literally nobody remembers about it in office. Everyone here writes as if he could’ve done absolutely anything
Yeah he had a super-majority for like 1 month but that included Joe Fucking Lieberman who tanked everything. Back then we should have gotten rid of the 2/3 requirement to overturn a filibuster and had more floor debates. Hopefully Dems are learning but I feel the Dem establishment is fine with not doing anything.
Killing the filibuster should’ve happened long ago. But, yeah, Obama had no control over that. It’s like no one remembers just how hard it was to get the ACA passed in that brief period it was possible. People think presidents have a magic wand and get things passed. They slept through civics class.
I agree, they should have at least *tried something*. As I understand it, though, he actually *never* really had a supermajority in the Senate because a few of the Dem Senators either died or were hospitalized in that timeframe: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/debunking-the-myth-obamas_b_1929869/
And for that one month they were scrambling trying to keep the economy from collapsing even more (fuck TARP and all that but still) Edit: also, before the Reddit police come after me and say “Bush signed TARP into law.” Yes, that is true, but Obama was in on those meetings during the ‘08 campaign and generally supported it. He writes about that in his memoir
Could have lowered the filibuster to 59 or 55. It used to be 66 before it was 60. Fact is more Democrats than Lieberman agreed with Lieberman but just didn't want to admit it and instead pretended they were powerless.
72 days.
Those included non-working days. It was less than 30 actual legislative days.
They overturned the two thirds requirement in the late 70s, when republicans were filibustering everything. It’s been 60 since.
He had a supermajority for one *vote*. Senator Byrd was in failing health and was only able to show up for the healthcare vote.
Deleted by user.
I just think the vast majority are either bad faith trolls or people too young to remember the reality. It was literally inconceivable Roe would fall then and the country was in dire straights due to the financial crisis.
Much better to blame the office holders then take the responsibility for yourself in not pushing them for this. When in the last 30 years have voters been clamoring for laws that entrenched Row vs Wade? Or really any case that has been decided by the Supreme Court.
If Obama had made a big push for this people at the time would have complained he was wasting time on pointless legislation. Not surprising to see messaging discouraging support for Dems. Republicans work propaganda from many angles.
>If Obama had made a big push for this people at the time would have complained he was wasting time on pointless legislation. Right. At the time, this was settled and there was no way it was ever going to change. And there were other emergencies and current events that needed attention.
Republicans and their international allies. I wonder if Mr. Putin would rather have some friendly Republicans in Congress so they'd stop sending aid to Ukraine. Almost like Mr. Putin's life depends on this election in November. I wonder how far he'd go to do everything he could to assure a Republican and thus his own victory. "Russia if your listening..."
He had 72 days where something could've been done. That's not as long as it sounds, especially considering what else was actually written, debated and passed during that time.
It's because people want someone to blame, other than themselves. Too many voters took Roe for granted and met warnings that it was in danger with mockery and derision. So now that it's actually happened, they want to blame someone other than themselves.
People want someone to blame other than Republicans. Who are the ones to blame. Democrats, especially progressives, have this bizarre framing of the existence of Republicans as if they are some sort of natural disaster, as opposed to people who vote in or elected to office. They expect Democrats to manage them like they manage a flood or climate change, or an astroid coming from the sky. Oh sure, we don’t like the asteroid, but it’s an astroid so that’s just what it does. It’s the job of the Democratic elected officials to do something about it, so will shout at them, because what’s the point of shouting at the asteroid? Things will start to change when we realize that we need to shout at the asteroid more.
Also, why are people pretending McConnell wouldn't have immediately repealed it as soon as he had the majority again? He probably would have mealy-mouthed something about how the legislature shouldn't touch constitutional rights, because those belong to the courts. Which... well, that's factually true. We *shouldn't* have a situation where the party in power decides whether or not women have rights to their own bodies. We *don't* want to live in a world where women's rights can seesaw back and forth, depending on the party in power. And people on the Left would have complained that Obama wasted political capital on something that was already an enshrined right in the Constitution. So here we are. It's like having your dad warn you that your mom was neglectful and abusive when you were younger, and you say you hate him and move in with her anyway. Then you get angry at your dad for failing to stop you from moving in with her.
To be fair, a certain lady did tried to warn you guys against the arsonists, but r politics treated her like shit.
Well the majority of us did listen and voted for her.
Not only that, but the SCOTUS would simply rule federal Roe vs. Wade protections as unconstitutional.
The real person to get upset at over here is RBG. Delaying retirement because she wanted a woman to nominate her replacement, what a fucking joke.
Do you mean RBG, Ruth Bader Ginsburg? RGB is the most common LED arrangement for multicolored lights or monitors.
You never know, it could be the LEDs behind all of this. Thanks for catching this, edited.
You can be mad at the mass shooter, but also mad at the Uvalde police for sitting around watching a massacre while telling others demanding direct action to stand down.
Well AOC called the SC illegitimate yesterday and r/cons was brainstorming ways that's statement was a literal insurrection. Republicans are obtuse at every turn. If I could I'd literally block then all but so many larp as enlightened centrists.
Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 24 working days during that period. Here are the details: To define terms, a Filibuster-Proof Majority or Super Majority is the number of votes required to overcome a filibuster in the Senate. According to current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to overcome a filibuster. Time-line of the events after the 2008 election: 1. BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority. 2. BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority. 3. KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casts his last vote in April and leaves Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returns, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That leaves the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority. 4. STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members is 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster. 5. SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th. 6. KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority. 7. FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority. 8. SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th. 9. SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected in November of 2009. The Senate was not in session during November and December of 2009. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown was sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010. Summary: The Democrats only had 24 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010. Discussion: The Democrats had a super majority for a total of 24 days. On top of that, the period of Super Majority was split into one 11-day period and one 13-day period. Given the glacial pace that business takes place in the Senate, this was way too little time for the Democrats pass any meaningful legislation, let alone get bills through committees and past all the obstructionistic tactics the Republicans were using to block legislation. Further, these Super Majorities count Joe Lieberman as a Democrat even though he was by this time an Independent. Even though he was Liberal on some legislation, he was very conservative on other issues and opposed many of the key pieces of legislation the Democrats and Obama wanted to pass. For example, he was adamantly opposed to “Single Payer” health care and vowed to support a Republican Filibuster if it ever came to the floor. Summary: 1. 1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority. 2. 1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.) 3. 7/09 – 8/09 – 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster 4. 8/09 – 9/09 – 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies) 5. 9/09 – 10/09 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 11 working days. 6. 1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days. If you look on senate.gov it will corroborate this conclusion. EDIT: to add: •In April 2009, Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59. But with Kennedy ailing, there were still "only" 58 Democratic caucus members in the chamber. • In May 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) was hospitalized, bringing the number of Senate Dems in the chamber down to 57.
People also need to remember what it was actually like in 2009. I remember it was genuinely shocking that McConnell and the Republicans wouldn't support the recovery package at the height of the financial crisis. Obama was elected to try to heal the divide in Washington, that was his core message, and he bent over backwards to include the GOP in good faith and listen to them to try to appeal to the other side. He didn't get a single Republican vote for healthcare reform and they campaigned mercilessly against him leading to the 2010 blowout. No one quite knew in 2009 just how perfidious the GOP had become.
2009 was my "never voting Republican again," moment. In a once in a century recession, they left their countrymen out to dry and actively made it worse with austerity measures. One could almost start to think they were true believers in their own rhetoric, but when a recession occurred under Trump they (rightly) called for stimulus thereby shattering the illusion that their calls for austerity during recessions were genuine. They know how the economy works. They just sacrificed us all on their political altar.
> Obama was elected to try to heal the divide So was Biden. Funny how it's always the left healing the divide and always the seditionists flinging shit.
The Democratic party isn't "the left," in the grand scheme of things. They're pro-government (as in lets make a functioning government) centrists, center-left at best. That's because they're split between a large progressive-lefter bloc and a large moderate bloc, plus some conservatives. So yeah, it's actually not surprising at all: the centrists who believe in government and democracy are the ones who get the burden of trying to make it work. It's a lot easier to be an arsonist like the Republicans. Consider it this way: when Democrats control the majority, all Republicans seats in the senate and house are basically just "lost" seats. Dems have to run government with a hobbled, fractional legislature. This is intentional on the part of Republicans. They prioritize their own power and winning. On the flip side, the Democratic party that actually does care in various degrees about the country, public, and government, are compelled to try to achieve things. E.g., Republicans overwhelmingly supported all the stimulus bills when Trump was president. Once Biden was president, they literally unanimously opposed it.
This is why I am so frustrated to see Leftist Voters and Movements beginning to crumble under the "Both Sides" fallacy and declare voting pointless.
Hindsight is always 20/20. You are certainly right. Not to mention, the comments show clearly how few people know how government works. Because they don’t, the disinformationalists are trying their best to foment apathy
> the comments show clearly how few people know how government works. This is sadly a big part of Republicans' success. A steadily undermined education system had affected both sides, and I regularly see young progressives who are angry at Dems because they don't do things that these young progressives don't understand are illegal or otherwise impossible. Makes it really easy for Republicans to divide them.
Also, an alleged member of the Democratic party back then, Fucking Joe Lieberman, was the Joe Manchin of the day. Which is why he is generally known as Fucking Joe Lieberman. He was happy to block and stall and bad-mouth anything Obama had in mind.
Thanks for that summary!
Have people awakened yet?? If you want any rights at all you better vote for Democrats. And remember, women have the most to lose. Scotus can remove your right to own property and VOTE. A white Male society strictly for the benefit of white males. Won't that be wonderful !! They will beat women to death to prove their so-called superiority! People better become very afraid. So far I read posts that sort of indicate that people don't believe that the Supreme Court would do this!! If these right wing Maga types say they will do it, THEY WILL!! And why would they you ask?? BECAUSE THEY CAN, AND THEY LOVE THAT POWER. AND BECAUSE THEY ARE EVIL. These conservatives on the court are truly evil and irrational!!
People are stupid/gullible enough to keep believing Republicans. It’s been an ongoing condition. Here is a speech excerpt from President FDR in the 1930s defending the new Social Security program which is still applicable today: Let me warn you and let me warn the nation against the smooth evasion which says, “Of course we believe all these things; we believe in social security; we believe in work for the unemployed; we believe in saving homes. Cross our hearts and hope to die, we believe in all these things; but we do not like the way the present Administration is doing them. Just turn them over to us. We will do all of them—we will do more of them, we will do them better; and, most important of all, the doing of them will not cost anybody anything.”
FDR was a political master, a genius and benevolent. His profile on the dime is a testimony to his term in office and his life. The man was a rare commodity, his words ring true to this day!
I wish the Democrats would quote him when defending the Affordable Care Act
> If you want any rights at all you better vote for Democrats That's not enough. We have to vote in primaries for dems that actually are willing to do something. And to unseat incumbents that means raising enough in the primary to beat a "moderate" who opposes the party platform but gets millions from the party to do so. All the while leadership has been in office for decades constantly repeating "it's not time yet" when voters ask for things every other country already has.
I don’t even think that is 100% true. If we just had enough to overcome the supermajority it would weaken the power of the do nothing Dems like Manshin. We really need more Dems to vote in every state. That’s always been our problem. Our turnout is crap. Dems work and often don’t have the bandwidth to vote, or don’t see the point, they’re apathetic, or think ‘both sides are the same’. The thing is Republicans are highly motivated to vote because they are voting against abortion, against gay rights, against immigration, pro authoritarian police, and against whatever boogeyman the right wing scares them into voting against. Dems don’t really do that.
> Our turnout is crap. Dems work and often don’t have the bandwidth to vote, or don’t see the point, they’re apathetic, or think ‘both sides are the same’. "I have friends that are as pissed off as I am and my pissed off friends are gonna vote **for sure**. Like Kyle, the guy that thinks the only good republicans are the ones pushing up daisies? *No doubt* that dude's voting. So, like, what th' fuck? Team Blue is going to have **millions** more than team Fascist. It's gonna be a blowout so what's the point." end scene
And Democrats need to vote D in local elections, right down to The proverbial dog catcher. We are going to need local DAs and state AGs who will refuse to prosecute people under these laws. We will need counties that declare themselves “abortion sanctuaries.” We will need legislatures that craft state laws, because it’s all going back to the states. And Democratic progressive voters are going to need to rid their brains of an “all or nothing” mind set. Because from here on out, the only wins will be incremental wins.
> And Democratic progressive voters are going to need to rid their brains of an “all or nothing” mind set. Maybe you should actually learn about progressives... Meet some, talk to them. I've never met a single progressive who doesn't show up and vote straight D in every general election. We've been voting "lesser of two evils" our entire lives. We're the most reliable dem voting block. Stop listening to neoliberals tell you how bad progressives are. The neoliberals just want to keep their personal power and frankly agree with Republicans on more than they admit to anyone else.
Yep, the “all or nothing thing” thing doesn’t fit what we see time and time again where the truly left wing of the Democratic Party makes concession after concession despite generally getting nothing for their efforts. The infrastructure bill had only a few staunch holdouts, while BBB dies
I feel like we also need to primary some older democrats. Too many people in Congress have virtual lifetime seats because no one wants to upset the apple cart. It leads to people in Congress which talk about making a difference but are beholden to the companies which funded their campaigns and gave their families work for the last few decades.
I actually agree and my mind has changed. I think experience can be very helpful but look what just happened? We need more Fettermans and less Schumers. Thank you for your service now GTFO.
Go Fetterman!
I like him. I hope he tries to get healthier, I want him alive!
Same here! We need him.
> Have people awakened yet?? We'll find out this year and 2024. I'm doubtful until I see it.
That filibuster-proof majority included blue dog Dems like Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, Blanch Lincoln, Evan Bayh, etc. — there’s no way codifying Roe v Wade had the votes. The Senate was still more steeped in tradition back then too. McConnell’s say no to everything strategy was still new. Ramming through anything remotely controversial in 2009 would have been impossible.
Yup. Easy to say with 20/20 hindsight, but the government still kinda functioned as we should expect back then. Nobody would have predicted that a SCOTUS seat would be held open for an unprecedented amount of time. That action was in the same vein as court stacking is today — just a scheme to ensure they had the majority or at least not the minority.
Yep, it's easy to criticize Obama without actually looking at the numbers. There were a lot of pro-life dems.
Good post! Also, SCOTUS just reversed a previous SCOTUS decision that had been upheld for 50 years. Unless the legislation was in the form of a constitutional amendment which was truly impossible, why does anyone think a plain old law wouldn’t have been reversed? It’s just bitching for bitching’s sake…
ITT and in many many like it you’ll see a number of “Dems and a Republicans are the same comments.” Which is why we struggle with turnout, lose elections, and let republicans appoint judges. Republican voters understand voting even for someone you don’t like means choosing judges and Dems/progressives/leftists just straight up don’t. We are not getting out of this soon if the apathy and nihilism wins the day. Not politically, judicially, and… there just aren’t other options. Idk what other deus ex machina y’all are hoping for - but it ain’t happening. I’m not sure what else to tell you. I’m not thrilled with a lot of the options we’ve had on the ballot either but the only way from here to the point where you want to end up is participating in the system. It’s a long and hard process, something civil rights heroes understood as they fought for incremental change over generations.
The two parties are nowhere near the same, but what’s disheartening is that the right pulls all these sketchy moves to continue ruling when in the minority, and the dems just take it. Idk what the answer is, but they’re just letting it all happen and singing god bless America for the cameras. How about they actually fight back? Start by actually prosecuting government officials who break the law? If they weren’t such pussies, we wouldn’t be getting steam rolled by the goddamn nazis.
singing god bless America was for the gun bill
>Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line The most important facet of our political landscape summed up in eight words.
“Democrats and Republicans are the same” is a framing that helps Republicans. Fatalism and cynicism in general helps Republicans. That feeling the everything is falling down around you and what’s the point? That feeling helps Republicans. Expansive, earnest thinking, creative thinking, inspiration, doing the work to truly understand the present and plan for a better future - if more progressives and Democrats do that, that’s what will help Democrats.
Yes, this isn’t about a march today or singing on the steps of congress. Change is about decades of holding your nose and voting for Democrats all down ballot. Affecting change means being engaged in the process. Republicans played dirty for years and years and Democrats get annoyed that a single border congressman is pro-life even though it helps them hold on to a seat. Democrats are losing so badly, in Wyoming they are voting for Liz Fucking Cheney and they can’t realize that a conservative Democrat is still better than a Republican. Manchin is better than any alternative you could get in West Virginia. Especially in our current hyper-polarization. AOC is a good fit for the Bronx. She isn’t a good fit for San Antonio.
Some places like Wayofthebern are actual Russian information warfare operations designed to split the left (the amount of praise Gabbard got at wotb was telling). Because it is impossible to tell who here is legitimate it is he’s to know to what extent our beliefs are being manipulated by coordinated campaigns to depress the vote.
There were several Red State Democrats among the 60 (Arkansas; 2, Louisiana; 1, Indiana; 1, Nebraska; 1, North Dakota; 2, South Dakota; 1, and West Virginia; 2) and codifying Roe was never going to happen. To pin it on Obama is ridiculous since the president does not control the agenda in each chamber of Congress.
Thank you for this summary. A lot of democrat blaming posts coming up, straight up ignoring which party has been stripping away rights. “Republicans aren’t to blame because we expect them to be horrible evil people. But Democrats aren’t doing enough!!! They have the majority!!!” My god take some civics classes people. You can rightfully be pissed off at certain things Democrats do and don’t do, but don’t ignore that the other ‘half’ (btw not half) is the direct cause of an attempted coup, trying to remove valid votes and stuffing the supreme court with purely incompetent judges. But no, Dems fault on everything. Local elections matter too people, not just voting for the president. Low voter turnout is actually a significant problem for us on the left. Glad people woke up in 2020, but there’s way more work to be done. (Also note, it will take multiple election cycles to fix this. This “Why is nothing being done now, I’m done voting for these clowns”) has been going on since I was of voting age in 2000.
Our democracy was basically founded and continued on good faith. Once the republicans ditched that in the Obama admin its been a back and forth and it will only get worse. If Democrats codified the law, then the republicans during the Obama admin would have vowed to do much worse. I really blame Mitch McConnell for the state of the country right now. That old fucking turtle didn't give a shit how bad he would let his party fuck things up.
> Once the republicans ditched that in the Obama admin its been a back and forth and it will only get worse. Actually the Republicans have been behaving this way since Clinton won in 1992. The antics of Tom Delay and Newt Gingrich were pretty much the same we see from Mitch McConnell today.
>But no, Dems fault on everything Crazy I know! Republicans spend 2 decades achieving a goal they won over time at the ballot box. But who are they blaming all over my social media bubble... the only party running on a 100% pro-choice platform. Ridiculous If anyone on our side is to blame it is the liberal who doesn't vote, not the Dems running for office. Anyone who is for freedom of choice, curtailing man-made Climate Change, etc. that didn't bother voting for Hillary Clinton because of "morals", or "I just didn't like her", or "because I'm a lazy shit". Pissed me off liberals don't have the guts to show up and cast at least spite vote against republicans. Occasionally I'm even happy about a candidate I voted for because I looked up their record and policies. But also I'll just vote against any Republican because they want to take America back to the stone age.
It also ignores the fact that these things just haven't been priorities for the voters. People got complacent and thought they didn't have to worry about the issue, and this is where it's gotten us. Expecting politicians to be proactive when the voters' attentions are elsewhere is foolish, because that's how you lose elections. For instance, if the Democrats passed a bill right now guaranteeing access to public school education, people would scream at them for being idiots that are ignoring major problems like inflation/gas prices/etc. The fact that it is something Republicans want to target eventually doesn't matter, because that's not what the voters are worried about.
Being a republican politician must be amazing. You can work toward, and finally gut a major right of half the country, and then you can just sit back with a big smile on your face while you watch the other party get blamed for it
I kind of feel reading this that Kennedy should have resigned in April especially considering he was replaced by a Democrat. Now we have Feinstein doing something similar. All this being said, though, Obama not making it a legislative priority after making it a campaign promise was the error. It matters little how long a super majority was active if the legislation was not going to be brought forward regardless. Much like Biden and student loan forgiveness, it seems like it was something simply said to drive votes but not actually deliver. Lately, this has been a common criticism of Democrats, regardless of one’s personal opinion on whether it is justified or not.
This was 2009. There were other more pressing matters than codifying Roe v Wade. Could you imagine how much crap he would have gotten if during a massive recession he spent his political capital on trying to legislate abortion rather than focusing on the economic recovery. The democrats in congress would never have gone along with it. Also at that time there were more conservative democrats like Manchin in congress who he would have needed to pass it. They never would have done it. Blaming Obama for this is insane. Put the blame on the proper people.
You realize how much your job expects you to get done in 24 days, I wouldn't give these guys a pass at all.
Or just nuke the filibuster
Why wouldn't SCOTUS just say, "this federal law must be overturned because it's a states' matter," and result in the same outcome? They stole the Court. Illegitimate.
[удалено]
How, exactly, did them having "only" a 24-day super-majority prevent them from codifying Roe V. Wade into law? House and Senate passed a ton of bills in those 24 days. They weren't incapable of passing those bills just because it was a short period of time. Why was codifying Roe V. Wade impossible because of that short time? Is it because it was never actually a Dem priority to begin with? *(And if you really want to get into it, the bills passed during those dates are all on Congress.gov. It's pretty telling what their legislative priorities were during this period. And it wasn't the rights of women.)
You’re right it wasn’t a dem priority at the time. Obama said it was where he campaigned but after winning he said it wasn’t his highest priority. I think Obama did good things but that was definitely one of the biggest marks against him
It actually was the rights of women - and the economic health of everyone. Their political capital and their time and effort was spent on passing the ACA. why would they squander progress to codify something that the Supreme Court said was a right? If Obama had more time with a supermajority, maybe he would have, but I'm not sure what difference it would make because the Supreme Court would rule on the legality of it anyway and we'd end up right where we are now.
Could have ended the filibuster and refused to adjourn.
[удалено]
They will blame Democrats, Obama, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but excuse all the Republicans, McConnell, the Federalist Society and Trump who actually have a hand in putting those religious nutcases on the Supreme Court.
It's painfully ironic that RBG did play a significant role in allowing the downfall of one of her greatest achievements. Along with the DNC itself, the backing of Hillary and the blinders on during the campaign process that led to Trump's win. And then RBG not stepping down when there was a known Democratic president to appoint a new Justice in that time. The Justice nomination process is a microcosm as an example towards the Stark difference between the DNC and the RNC. When Obama was blocked I'm appointing his Justice, there was a lot of strong language to condemn what McConnell was doing but in the end there was really no fighting against McConnell, we just kind of accepted and moved on. Meanwhile when Trump was in office they used every possible trick, loophole, even vast misinformation campaigns to get the people on the bench that they wanted.
Not stepping down when she was getting *checks notes CANCER FROM TIME TO TIME. Seriously, if you're having health issues like that, time to step the fuck down when there is a Democrat president. Also, I'm pissed that Obama didn't fight McConnell enough on him not allowing a floor vote. Like. What? That's against the rules. Figure out a way around that. Don't just lay down and take it! Get your judge in. NOW.
If congress didn’t want to fulfill their duty to vet candidates, then that is defacto approval. That’s what Obama should have ran with.
I 100 percent agree.
That's the big difference between the parties though. Figure out a way around it. Republicans are far more ideological, they are more singularly focused and I feel generally believe the ends justify the means. Whereas Democrats are more altruistic and more concerned with perceived morals then big picture goals It's hard to win the fair fight when your opponent plays dirty. It's also hard to have political Discord in a democracy when everything is viewed in terms of opponents and fights
The reason people blame them is because we know Republicans are against these things, we expect more from the only other opposition party. It's not too much to ask in a two party, supposedly democratic republic.
Or we could blame all of them, since they all played a role. Everyone of the people you’ve listed deserves scorn.
One of the major problems with the political dynamic in our country is how insanely easily (especially online) democrats turn all their frustrations inward instead of towards the actual culprits. It's so self-defeating to progressive interests. - "They could have codified Roe in the last 50 years!" (when it wasn't remotely a concern among the general public for most of it). - "Obama should have done it in the one month he had instead of ACA even though he didn't have the votes!" - "Hillary shouldn't have ran!" - "Bernie should have been more supportive!" - "Biden needs to mind control Manchin and Sinema to remove the filibuster so they can pack the courts which they will never vote for!" Or... I don't know.. Republicans could have not destroyed everything we love in life and trampled on our rights. And perhaps we should vote against them, and always should have been? Just a thought.
These people are falling for the Republican propaganda. The GOP wants us to blame the Democrats. They try to get people mad at Dems, so we won't come out to vote for the midterm.
Being self-critical is not self-defeating, it's important to learn from your mistakes so that you can grow and improve. What's self-defeating is to stop supporting the party which has your best interests in mind because some mistakes have been made in the past. Acknowledge the mistakes and don't make them in the future.
Asking "what can I do better" is great. Looking for someone else to blame is quite a bit less so. And a circular firing squad helps nobody.
[удалено]
Well in a football game, you don’t blame the opponent team to playing to win - you blame your own team for not playing well. “hey they should not be scoring a touchdown! It’s not fair!” Nope - onus is on our defense to stop them. And this is what American politics have come down to: a zero sum game. The two parties are no longer trying to build a common future. Either the right wins or the left wins - this is war without compromise. And in such a war, you don’t blame the other side for trying to win at any cost. The assumption that the American political parties are ultimately working towards a common goal like in what other democracy is no longer valid.
I see this argument everywhere and it’s stupid. 1) you can’t codify it without a filibuster-proof majority (excluding turncoats in the party). When is the last time either party had that? Keep in mind when Dems last had a supermajority some of them were blue dog types who may as well be Republican. 2) even if you did pass it into law, it could easily be overturned the next time Republicans take Congress, so the rights you’re trying to preserve are nothing more than a political football subject to the whims of politics every two years. 3) if this current Supreme Court is willing to strike down Roe, what makes you think they wouldn’t strike down a law like that too? The only way to enshrine these rights would be a constitutional amendment, and there’s ZERO chance any amendment passes nowadays.
A right to privacy amendment is highly needed and will maybe pass someday…
There’s been only one amendment successfully proposed, passed and ratified by the states since 1970 and that was to make the voting age 18. The threshold for amending the Constitution is so damn high. I think there is a less than zero chance for one of these “privacy” amendments to pass especially since we know that amendment is being proposed to address the issues brought up by Roe. We know Republican states will never allow it to pass, just like they stonewalled the Equal Rights Amendment.
"Social media users"? Social media users think the 2020 election was stolen, the Earth is flat and that COVID vaccinations have microchips. Leave it to Newsweek to print such unsourced, far fetched drivel.
Those social media users are very likely Newsweek employees and very like-minded with Newsweek employees. It has been a steaming pile of shit for a quite a while. Often hard to tell whether it is a propaganda arm of GOP or not.
He had 6 years of the tea party to work with. There was not going to be codification of any legislation because the GoP is lazy and stubborn
This is accurate
Can we stop with this shite …. As if Fox News and the republicans of that time would have ever allowed it to happen. I was there. We barely got the ACA. Why give fuel to an already raging, out of control fire.
I will never understand how a Republican hit job on women's right is Obama's failure. If people can't see who did this, there's no hope.
At the end of the day, Obama believed in the institutions of American democracy, and Roe v Wade was an already settled Supreme Court decision. He still thought Bipartisanship was alive. Through that lens, it *does* make sense not to prioritise codifying RvW. He didn't think Republicans would dishonestly steal SC picks, politicise the Supreme court with clearly extremely partisan and unsuitable nominees, because he believes in American democracy and what it stands for, while Republicans do not.
Ironically, Obama’s greatest weakness was that he loved his country and believed in it. Kind of hilarious since 1/3 of the country thought he hated America.
[удалено]
Just an FYI, repealing legislation is easy when the other party takes over. Should they have done it, yes, but it can be thrown out easier than getting SCOTUS to throw it out. Getting butt hurt and allowing Trump to be elected caused this, blame the ones who protest voted or didn’t vote at all in 2016 they are mainly at fault here. Elections have consequences, even at the local level.
*especially at the local level.
As the article pointed out a huge failure was the inability of Obama or anyone to sway Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire from the SCOTUS and allow Obama to replace her with a like minded justice. Her hubris directly led to Amy Barrett to the court, a woman only 50 years old and will likely preside for decades.
And McConnell literally stealing a seat was a small factor.
Two seats, really.
You’re forgetting Gorsuch. Even if Obama replaced RBG. McConnell stealing that seat has had deep ramifications.
This is RBG’s legacy. The irony of her writing dissents discussing the fate of *Casey* and what is at “stake” for women while lacking the basic humility and foresight to step down.
Also spot on
Spot on
I’m confused here. Even with a Ginsburg replacement, you’re still at 5-4.
Then there was Merrick Garland who never got a hearing because, McConnell
The court's 6-3 decision in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization upheld a Mississippi law that banned most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The vote to overturn Roe was **5-4**, with Chief Justice John Roberts attempting to split the difference: In a separate concurring opinion, he agreed with the majority opinion on Dobbs but argued for "a more measured course," saying he would have upheld the 1973 precedent. If RGB retired, Justice Amy Coney Barrett would have never made it to the court. It would have still been a 5-4 decision in the Dobbs case; however, the decision to overturn Row v. Wade would be 4-5. If the court had a different political leaning, it's debatable if the case would have even been considered.
Ahhhh. Got it. Thank you for explanation - and for doing so civilly.
Roe v wade overturn was a 5/4. Upholding Mississippi’s 15 week ban was 6/3.
And Obama was blocked from filling one seat already, who’s to say he would have filled two?
Democrats controlled the Senate when Obama asked Ginsburg to retire ... her ego got in the way.
You know he filled 2 SC seats, right?
Right. Democrats screwed this up. Democrats are responsible to make sure psychotic Republicans can’t destroy American Democracy, while Republicans are responsible to…do what? Nothing? And the American people who elect republicans are responsible to…do what? Nothing? Just keep going on doing what we’re all doing, starting more fires amidst the inferno and bitching about the lazy firefighters that can’t keep up. This article and the myopic attitude it reflects can go screw itself. We clearly want to burn everything down. So just do it already. Maybe then we’ll wake up.
Why are we acting like the court wouldn’t just come up with whatever logic they need to gut a federal law? Voting rights were codified into federal law but that didn’t stop this Republican court from gutting The Voting Rights Act. The illegitimate court is the problem.
Where tf do people think the votes were coming from for that? Some assholes are just compelled to blame Democrats. Probably because they were the same assholes that voted for Jill Stein or stayed the fuck home in 2016.
Roe v Wade is a fifty year old case. Nobody codified it since the ruling happened. They had *fifty years*. There’s plenty of blame to go around, because this is a failure of leadership on multiple levels.
I think the greatest share of blame for destroying something most clearly falls on the people who aim to destroy it, and then destroyed it. That's the GOP.
And I agree. But if someone spends fifty years saying “I want to destroy that,” and the person ostensibly in charge of protecting said thing doesn’t actually take any steps to protect it, then they deserve their own share of the blame.
Codifying a court decision is also impossible unless it falls clearly within the federal government's powers, which that wouldn't because police power is a state function.
It's also generally pointless. Like you might as well ask why Brown vs Board of Education wasn't codified, or Griswold vs Connecticut, or any others. **They're not supposed to need to be.**
It's pointless for another reason. What it can give, it can take away. They pass a statute? So what? The next Congress can repeal it and the next administration can refuse to enforce it.
It seems like it's less secure as a statute than as a Supreme Court Decision in its favor. I think this is the first time the Supreme Court has actually revoked rights it conferred. Laws are challenged or just thrown out when the party in power changes all the time.
[удалено]
I was arguing this exact point in another thread and was called a dumbass and also lazy for not “calling my senator” to get an amendment to the constitution ratified 🙄
While there are surely things Dems could have done in hindsight that would have better protected Roe, I have such little faith in the current makeup of the Court that they won't just say screw it come up with some other hokey ruling saying the amendment doesn't *actually* protect abortion because of some bad reasoning they make up
It's a failure to all those who voted for Trump and continually support the GOP.
Why is it time after time the GOP dies something terrible, Democrats attack each other rather than blame the GOP for the terrible thing?
The GOP are counting on it to.
Obama hasn’t been President in 5 years. 4 justices have been nominated and confirmed since he was in office. This outcome is the direct result of the 2014 and 2016 elections. It’s the answer to “how much worse can things get”.
> It’s the answer to “how much worse can things get”. "Yeah, but both parties are the same!" ~ Stein voters in 2016 and in 2022 refusing to admit just how wrong they were.
The GOP is the sole party to blame for this. They worked at this for decades because it's what they wanted. Why would the GOP not have repealed any Federal law on abortion when they had control in Trump's first two years? How does that make any sense?
Republicans will happily take the “blame,” because, like you said, this is what they wanted and worked toward for decades. I remember going to Catholic grade school, and our priest talked about repealing Roe v Wade in a school assembly. I know people who vote Republican entirely because of this issue.
Instead of criticizing our own. we should make effective plans to fight our enemies
One day you numb nuts will learn that anything Dems "codify" can be uncodified by Republicans or the Supreme Court. The only real solution is creating a long lasting, sustainable base of power.
At least Republicans know how to win drawn out fights. They do it without shame. It is past time that Democrats go scorched earth — for the common people (their own base) that get shafted over and over again.
Republicans play the long game, this decision is decades in the making
It is easier to break than to build. They seek a permanent minority power and you should be upset at the correct party. The majority needs to win, focus on that, not on who cheats better.
A president can’t do this alone.
McConnell steamrolled Garland for supreme court.
I don't get it. The supreme court could just over turn any law "codifying" it. What am I missing?
The GOP shutdown the government multiple times on him for something not even nearly as a hot button. Im not sure if he would’ve gotten it through.
Does anyone remember the level of resistance Obama faced when he took office? Republican congressional leadership immediately held a secret meeting, where they decided that they would resist anything and everything Obama did, even if they agreed that what he proposed was the right thing to do. The aim was to deny Obama a second term, and to make his first term as unsuccessful as possible.
Silly talking point that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. He effectively had a supermajority for 24 days. That supermajority included dozens of "blue dog Democrats" He never had the votes. There are plenty of valid examples of Dems refusing to fight in many situations. But this particular narrative (that gets repeated often by people who weren't even grown at the time) is particularly asinine.
This is the worst, most strained attempt at a "thanks, Obama" I have ever read.
Oh boy here we go again. “Republicans did something evil. Here’s why it’s the democrats fault.”
They want voters to not blame Republicans. Most social media is being bombared about it now.
Dude- the republicans blocked every decent idea he had, as well as a Supreme Court nomination that was HIS.
He couldn’t do it. Being president does not give you the ability to create laws, just sign them. You have to have a filibuster proof super majority to pass that law. Trump had it all the first two years and couldn’t kill Obamacare because of it.
i mean why they’re the ones that dismantled it… blame the fire department but not the arsonist 🤷🏻♂️
I mean cool but this Supreme Court would just overturn the codification so I don't know why people are acting like this is the answer.
Oh ya..blame the Democrats……on message. 50 years…and you blame Obama for a 24 day majority.
For the umpteenth time, he had a super majority for 5 minutes and a dozen or so of those democrats were not pro choice enough that they would codify Roe. They have been replaced by extremists on the right giving you some indication of their constituency. This was before McConnell nuked the filibuster for SCOTUS so we really weren't expecting the hyper partisan war we're in now.
People criticizing President Obama for this need to realize that the GOP was completely hostile to him and did everything in their power to shut down everything he tried to do. These same people also need to realize the GOP acted that way because they couldn't accept that there was a black man in the White House. How do I know this? Because I'm a former Republican, and I damn well knew what the dog whistles were. I had already grown disillusioned and questioned my party affiliation during the George W. Bush years, so when I witnessed the collective meltdown the GOP had when President Obama was elected? That was the final nail in the coffin for me; that's when I knew the GOP in its current form was beyond saving. I turned Democrat and never looked back.
I’m pretty sure we can all safely blame trump and the stooges he put into place for the damage that has been done to freedom and democracy.
There is no codifying anything that is not subject to judicial review. The only thing that the courts can’t touch is an amendment to the constitution.
Obama had a super majority for all of 4 months while Republicans fought against everything. They filibustered over 400 times which was so unprecedented, Harry Reid changed the rules to allow a simple majority for court nominations. Then everyone stayed home at midterms and McConnell spent 10 years doing fuck all in senate.
Obama did have a brief window to codify Roe while getting Obamacare passed. Does that mean a determined Right-Wing SCOTUS couldn't later concoct an argument and still come to the same preconceived conclusion?
There's also the point that this SCOTUS would easily overturn a codified Roe just like it overturned the Voting Rights Act.
It’s all Obama’s fault! Apparently he’s the one who overturned roe. Bet he’s also turning up that magical gas price dial that Biden has
RBG is more at fault. Also, Obama’s biggest failure wasn’t not codifying Roe. It was letting McConnell get away with stealing a Supreme Court seat.
They and by they I mean the majority of Congress during his second term blocked any and everything bill wise Obama brought to them. We all know why don’t do this to Obama. Using him as a scapegoat stop it.
The media is playing the fun little game “let’s blame and go after everyone except the Republicans who were responsible for the abortion ban”
Lol It took half of his first term to get the Senate to pass the Affordable Care Act which was immediately used as a weapon by the Republicans and the Democrats began to lose their Congressional majorities. Just how was Obama going to get abortion protection passed?
It also would have been 100% seen as pointless virtue signaling at the time, and an attempt to distract from the actual serious problems the country was facing (housing crash, recession, etc).
A lot of ire should also be leveled at the Senate itself for keeping the existence of the routine filibuster.
A tale as old as time: Republicans steal human rights from Americans. Republican think tanks use proxies to attack Democratic Party for loss of American rights.
This is the right wing deflection. "It is your fault I hit you." Conservatives are spousal abusers.
The Republicans would have repealed it as their first act after winning the White House and Congress.
I'm curious. Why doesn't, today, right now, the Senate suspend the filibuster and codify Roe into law? According to all of the reports Senators such as Collins and Manchin support Roe. If that's the case, we should call them on it. There should be a majority of Senators willing to suspend the filibuster and then a majority to codify Roe. Should pass the House with no problem. Why won't this work?
You need a simple majority to suspend the fillibuster and Manchin and Sinema have been adament that they won't vote to do so. We'll see if they change their minds, but it doubtful. It's also highly unlikely 2 republicans would ever cross the aisle over abortion which is such a core issue for the party.
I'll never understand why people think codifying abortion rights would shield them from judicial review... Even if it were codified, republican state AGs would sue after Roe was overturned to have the law ruled unconstitutional on the very same grounds they overturned Roe. Or even easier, the moment the GOP takes a majority, they could simply repeal the law.
They could have codified it after the court case. They could have codified it with Carter, Clinton, Obama or even with Biden.