Do you have a solution to enacting progressive policy that doesn't require electing a bunch of Democrats to create, introduce and vote on said legislation?
HQC
joined 1 year ago
The 20216 election was incredibly close. It doesn't take much to influence the final result with narrow margins, especially when considering our archaic voting system which significantly over-represents less populated areas (i.e. changing a few hundred votes in one district can be more influential than another district with 10x as many voters if all of those voters are more politically consistent).
I think I see where you are coming from, but there does need to be a line where we can just acknowledge reality.
What’s the reason behind thinking half of them are acting in bad faith? Is that because you disagree with them?
This is especially galling when talking about the Supreme Court specifically. McConnell refused to do his legal duty and allow a vote on the current President's nomination to replace Ginsburg. He and his party said this was because it was unfair to seat a new Justice during an election year.
Several years later, the exact same people rushed through a nomination and confirmation of a new Justice just weeks before the 2020 election. The two situations are as close to identical as can be practical with two real-world examples.
Please explain how this should be interpreted in a way that can be described as "operating in good faith".
Depends entirely on the subreddit, in my experience. Places like AskHistorians didn't even exist when the great Digg exodus occurred. My favorite sub was /r/cfb which also benefited greatly from the mainstream popularity.
Not coincidental that both of these are relatively strongly moderated compared to many of the biggest/default subs.
Maybe I am just am ignorant American, but Joe is Johnson at all comparable to Trump in terms of overthrowing democracy? I don't recall anyone storming Parliament or Boris claiming any elections were rigged.