4 ms·
Strictly, sevearal things. First, plurality. Second, they voted for Congress, as well. Where are they? Third, they trust in the entire system, even if their
by taeric 2y ago
Strictly, sevearal things.
First, plurality. Second, they voted for Congress, as well. Where are they? Third, they trust in the entire system, even if their trust has been manipulated by some agents. That is why we are supposed to have checks and balances.
- lazide 2y agoThe same people voted the folks into Congress too.
- slater 2y agoOne can only hope for a blue tsunami for the midterms, though I'm not getting my hopes up.
- jfengel 2y agoI can't imagine why 2026 should be any different than 2024. He's doing exactly what he promised. Those who voted for him will still be in favor, at least compared to the alternative. Voters who stayed home will still see no difference between the parties.
- lazide 2y agoYup. No one can claim ignorance the second time.
- amanaplanacanal 2y agoAs a wise man once said "it's the economy stupid." If their actions tank the economy, which seems a distinct possibility, things could change drastically.
- lazide 2y agoOnly if they don’t find a suitable scapegoat in time. I still hear people blaming Biden.
- giardini 2y agoAs they should! Everything you see around you was provided by Biden. Trump is only starting to make changes.
- lazide 2y agoI’m pretty sure Biden had as little to do with gas (or Egg) prices as Trump has.
- amanaplanacanal 2y agoThe President tends to get the praise or blame, no matter who actually did things. The Federal Reserve controls the money supply, and probably has more to do with inflation than anybody else.
- giardini 2y agoBiden was producing lots of gas in the later part of his term!8-))
- giardini 2y agoCherry-picking!
- throwaway48476 2y agoOnly possible if they reinvent themselves and dump as many 20/80 issues as possible.
- analog31 2y agoDemocrats need a super-majority to swing either the House or Senate.
- dangus 2y agoSure, but the whole idea of representative democracy (a Republic[1]) is supposed to be that Congress and other elected members of government are supposed to be immune from the trappings of mob rule. In other words, the excuse you are making is that people voted for the government to start doing borderline illegal or at the very least highly misguided and self-destrctive things that are against the interest of their constituents, and that because the people want those dumbass destructive things the government should comply with those wishes. That logic only goes so far when we consider the context of the very same government that also denies the people things that are far more popular. For example, 62% of Americans are in favor of universal healthcare, but we aren't getting that. 82% of Americans are in favor of paid maternity leave. And yet, our lawmakers have not delivered to the American people those demands. But here we all are implying that 51% of the country deciding they want to dismantle the US executive branch is enough public support to just go ahead and do so with impunity. The 2024 Trump presidency is, believe it or not, already a historically unpopular administration by the objective polling numbers. Why should they get to dismantle the government with such a weak mandate? Frankly, it's bullshit. [1] This is coincidentally the excuse that every Republican I've ever met including my Fox News Dad makes for the electoral college and gerrymandered congressional districts amplifying rural MAGA votes so that states with majority Democrat constituents are ruled by Republican statehouses and so that Trump and Bush got to win presidential elections without winning the popular vote.
- lazide 2y ago“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” - H.L. Mencken Elections matter. Don’t think I’m a Trump Fan. I’ve been warning about this exact thing since before the first election. But people had to go and stick the butter knife in the wall socket anyway, and they clearly need to learn the hard way what happens. What do you expect? A coup? I’m sure you know as well as anyone how that would go right now. Too few people are willing to believe what is actually happening right in front of them. And frankly, wouldn’t that just be being the enemy?
- jghn 2y agoLet's not forget that the house is artificially capped [1]. It should have a much larger membership. The senate already biases towards land over people. And more and more the house does as well. [1] https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/The-Permanent-Apportionment-Act-of-1929/ https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/Th...
- throwaway48476 2y agoThe Senate represents sovereign states.
- jghn 2y agoyes it does. The house does not. The senate was always set up to artificially prop up smaller (by population) states. The House was not. But we've artificially capped the House. Now they both favor lower population states.
- lazide 2y agoThose states would never have signed onto the constitution without the senate. It’s not ‘artificial’. It’s a core part of why the USA came to be.
- throwaway48476 2y agoArticles of confederation. This is also why the southern states were called the confederacy.
- jghn 2y agoWhy do you seem to believe anything I'm talking about involves the Senate mattering? I've discussed how the House had its membership artificially capped roughly 150 years into this country's history
- lazide 2y ago