When was the last time the Democrats held 50+ percent in both houses to pass legislation without needing to cooperate? Believe it was Obama for 2 months in 2009. So all complaining about this for the last decade has been moot.
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2025
0 points (NaN% liked)
Political Memes
9739 readers
5123 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Even if we ever get that again, people will be sorely disappointed because legislation will be too busy fixing damages from the previous administration to make much actual progress. Which will be forgotten by the next election (same as it ever was).
In 2048 Reagan's ghost will still haunt the country, plus Trump's ghost too.
60% for Obama, which is what was needed to overcome the filibuster, an utterly broken part of Senate procedure.
We had 50+VP for the first two Biden years, but that gave us no room to negotiate with our own party - or 'our own' party, considering that two of the most troublesome fuckwits later became independents when they decided they'd done all the damage they could inside the party. Add to Biden himself being not much more than a milquetoast moderate twat, and you have a recipe for very little getting done.
Not nothing. But not nearly what needed to be done, realistically speaking.
Why is that 60+ not a requirement for Republicans to pass the legislation and ratify nominations that they want? The Republicans haven't met that threshold since the 67th Congress back in 1921.
The 119th, 115th, 108th and 109th congresses which were all Republican trifectas didn't meet that criteria and the "tea party" and "establishment" flavors certainly aren't any more of a unified front than the democratic party.
Because Republicans don't infight anywhere near as much a Democrats.
I'm pretty convinced that trump has gotten as far as he has because the Democrats parts is like 50/50 corporate shills on Trump's payroll and ideologues.
Of course we never get anything done. Half the party is hellbent on selling out their constituents and the other on performative "moral victories."
We had exactly 60 seats for all of like two effective weeks in 2009, due to various issues. And not only that, a good portion of the dems in that coalition were blue dogs - senators from IA, ND, IN, and MO.
People acting like we've had 30+ Bernies in the caucus are weird.
We're poopooing Obama having the largest majority since reconstruction? Come the fuck on. What have the Republicans been doing with way less "power"? Democrats are useless.
It seems like that’s exactly the point, progressive democrats are very few and not even that progressive except for a few outliers.
I agree, that's why we need to replace around 70% of them, maybe 80%
Sounds better to start a whole new party instead of fight the entrenched majority.
Howso? Most people understand that third parties are counterproductive spoilers and won't risk it. You have to destroy one of the entrenched majorities first if you want a new party to accomplish anything.
You say “most people understand”, as though basically every other functioning democracy in the world doesn’t have at least five or more parties sitting in their legislature.
(edit: curious about which of the downvotes are people butthurt about their democracy sucking, which are from bots, and which are from cowardly votescolds who wrongly believe that the path to salvation is to keep whipping people into propping up a failed two-party system that has led to America now being classed as a "Flawed Democracy" for the last 9 years by the Economist Intelligence Unit)
You're getting downvoted because you think pretending the US isn't how it actually is will change it. Either that or you actively want to help the fascists
Surely you destroy one of the major entrenched parties by not voting for them and instead voting for someone else who can than take their place.
someone else who can than take their place.
That's the kicker. If you don't have a clean, single-cycle transition then you're handing control to your worst enemies.
If we're going to fracture a party, let's fracture the right. Destroy the worse one first, then siphon from the less worse one once the fracture takes.
Yeah, it's an absolutely unhinged argument to suggest that the only way to a multi-party democracy is to move to a one-party system first. They haven't thought it through at all.
Spoiler effect means magats would just win by default if we tried
Sure, but the us election system makes starting new parties and having them matter almost impossible.