• Dran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 days ago

    There are a lot of moderates that are hesitant about AOC. She’s expressed ideas like getting rid of the filibuster, which would be great while “your” party is in charge, but is one of the very few checks available for a minority party to halt truly controversial legislation. The extra steps are kind of dumb, but the foundational idea that legislation should at least require a 60/40 majority most of the time enforces an idea of compromise and representation in almost every bill.

    I would shudder to think what a bad president could put through if unchecked by the opposition party in an essentially 50/50 politically divided populace.

    • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      There are a lot of moderates that are hesitant about AOC

      Don’t worry. They’ll sit on their asses extra hard for the next election (LOL!) and make sure that the Cthulhu/Lucifer ticket wins.

      • Dran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        I try to keep my commentary as apolitical as possible, so what I’ll say is:

        If you believe that the current ticket is the Cthulhu/Lucifer ticket, imagine what they could accomplish if every bill only required a simple majority.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Who is in the majority in this scenario?

          Because, right now, I see the House/Senate in gridlock on everything except fucking over Transgender folks and Palestinians. Meanwhile, President DOGE is operating entirely unchecked while VP DHS is snatching people off the street and telling courts to pound sand.

          “Oh no! An activist Congress would be worse!” seems to belie the current state of affairs.

          • Dran@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            “simple majority” is a technical term in this context, it refers to any number >50%. In the context of the Senate, that’d be a 51/49 split, or a 50/50 split broken by the VP.

            There are some procedural measures that explicitly only require this simple majority to pass; most bills require a 60/40 in practice because that’s the threshold required to bypass a procedural filibuster. They at the very least require a simple majority + 0 members of a body opting to invoke filibuster.

            Say what you will about the people we’ve currently elected; I just stand by it being a sound procedural practice.

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      The filibuster is also a tool the democratic party isn’t using. No point in keeping something that only helps one side.

    • P00ptart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      6 days ago

      STOP FUCKING TALKING ABOUT ELECTIONS!!! ELECTIONS ARE NOT HAPPENING! GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK FUCKING SKULLS THAT VOTING WILL NOT SAVE US.