• roscoe@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Holding one of three branches is not “in power.”

    All spending bills have to originate in the republican controlled house. Anything the administration tries to do on it’s own has to survive a heavily politicized Supreme Court. A Supreme Court that would be radically different without the Trump presidency. We’ll be dealing with those Trump appointees for a generation and they’ll do far more harm than he ever did. Not enough people voting blue in 2016 is going to have very long lasting consequences.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Are you aware of who controlled the House, Presidency, and Senate from 2021-2023?

      Hint:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/117th_United_States_Congress

      Not enough people voting blue in 2016 is going to have very long lasting consequences.

      Hillary’s people trying to shove her down America’s throats and propping up trump in the primary because he was the only one she had a chance to beat is going to have very long lasting consequences.

      And letting those same people run Kamala’s campaign and still the DNC is still fucking shit up.

      When the only metric for DNC leadership positions is how much bribe money from billionaires total legit donations we shouldn’t be surprised the party and chosen candidate keep favoring money over votes

      Rather than yell at voters to accept it, maybe we should restructure the DNC so the people in charge know how to win an election against a candidate as terrible as trump?

      Edit:

      And for a fair comparison, trump also had 2 years with both houses than one split.

      Same as Biden.

      • roscoe@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        And? What does 21-23 have to do with who is “currently in power”? And how many SC justices has Biden appointed?

        Maybe you should read the entire conversation, it’s not long, instead of knee-jerking to one comment.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because most of the ones still in office right now (obviously including Biden) were also in office during the 117th Congress when Dems held both majorities?

          But this doesn’t feel like it’ll be productive for some reason.

          • roscoe@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Still don’t know how that makes 21-23 “current.” Just going to double-down on refusing to read the comment chain and make it about what you want, are you?