- cross-posted to:
- Ukraine_UA@kbin.social
- cross-posted to:
- Ukraine_UA@kbin.social
You must log in or register to comment.
I’m just waiting to see what the poison pill is. Johnson didn’t stall Ukraine aid for months just to put a clean bill forward. If he wanted a clean bill, he would have put the Senate’s bill up for vote months ago.
Any obvious poison-pills could be amended out though once debate starts. And I think that Democrats are unified enough that the small group of Hawkish moderate Republicans would support the amendments to fix the poison pills.
I dunno, I’m somewhat optimistic here. I think Johnson actually screwed himself over. This kind of “split” will prove to the American People that Republicans are against Ukrainian aid.
Johnson is from the far-right, who were collectively against “Omnibus” bills and whatnot. Johnson might actually be working with his morals / ethics here, and is biasing him towards this obvious error in politics. I think we should just accept the gift, if possible. I recognize that Johnson controls a lot of debate here, but if Johnson can promise behind close doors that all four of these bills will get “proper” treatment (ex: amendment process, debate, etc. etc.), its hard for him to screw this over.
Johnson’s main ability is killing the debate before it gets started. If he lets regular order debate the bill, it basically leaves his hands and can be changed for the better.
Or maybe I’m overly optimistic? But I’d rather be optimistic and accept a potential win, than pessimistic and reject this possible win for Ukraine.
I absolutely hope very very much that this will be the moment of sea change in American politics, where we fund Ukraine way too late (as opposed to after they’ve lost the war, which is what will happen if we don’t), and funding for Israel becomes a point of contention for the first time in decades and gets held up, after Netanyahu has done his absolute level best to tee up that result by being directly antagonistic to the US at the exact same time he’s ramping up his war crimes to historic and world-outraging levels
I am I have to say somewhat prepared to be disappointed though
No way Republicans will shoot down Israeli budget. So…
Lucy plans to hold the football for Charlie
Of course he is. Stinky traitorous bastard.
He wants to release Jan 6 videos just as soon as he can blur the faces of the perps. Can’t let traitors get identified.
I wish I could meet him and tell him what I think about his christo-fascist beliefs. Oh well…
It’s almost comical how the founders of USA created a 2 party system with a powerful presidency to have strong governance with an efficient decision process.
But this idiotic system has stalled USA for 8 months now.
The Mueller investigation did not find signs of Russian interference in the election, despite several of the people under investigation were in direct contact, Michael Flynn was proven to be a Russian agent, but was let go without any consequences.
And now the traitors have infested congress, and is doing the bidding of Russia! It’s really sad to watch the political decline of USA. And the level of obvious Republican corruption that continue to be allowed.For as long as I’ve been politically aware, the US system was never touted as having an “efficient decision process”. Care to clue me in on why you believe it does?
I don’t believe it does, but I was tought in school in the 70’s, that the reason USA was an imperfect 2 party democracy, was to create a “strong and efficient” government.
Don’t the Britts have some of the same? First by the post is such a moronic thing, that may ensure one side a majority, at the cost of having more parties. I think in the case of both USA and Britain, it’s proven pretty clearly it’s not a good system. Yet it’s maintained, because both the 2 dominant parties, enjoy power from efficiently excluding smaller parties can gain significance.
The founders didn’t create a two party system though. They created a living system that could grow and adapt but instead has been consistently rat-fucked by nefarious actors for decades now.
Political parties are not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, which predates the party system. The two-party system is based on laws, party rules, and custom.
Think “citizens united v. FEC” not citizens.
The blows to American Democracy proper are coming from corrupt Supreme Court judges right now, not conversations back in the 1700s.
The fucked up supreme court is created by an unbalanced 2 party system, and the 2 party system is a result of first past the post.
That there are more parties is irrelevant, because first past the post keep them out of real influence, as votes for them are wasted, because that’s the result of first past the post, as can be seen in UK too.
Democratic countries that don’t use first past the post generally have many parties, and much better representation of what the population actually wants.
There’s a saying that the difference between USA and China is just 1 party, unless you understand what that means, you simply don’t get the main flaw of US democracy.Eh. I agree that first past the post is a problem and there are better alternatives like ranked choice that should be adopted. It’s not the flaw that we disagree on.
The Supreme Court was created by congress and via arbitrary bullshit from… the Supreme Court.
The federal court system and the judicial authority to interpret the Constitution received little attention in the debates over the drafting and ratification of the Constitution. The power of judicial review, in fact, is nowhere mentioned in it.
It’s dishonest to claim others don’t get the main flaw of US democracy while you arbitrarily conflate the constitution with Marbury v. Madison, mistake discussions in the 1700s for decades of lobbying and generally put forth an argument that everything was fucked from the get go. It ignores the role of current nefarious actors and gives a pass to what is happening right now.
