• BrikoX@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      111th Congress (2009–2011)

      Majority Party: Democrats (57 seats)
      Minority Party: Republicans (41 seats)
      Other Parties: 1 Independent; 1 Independent Democrat (both caucused with the Democrats)

      Total Seats: 100

      Note: Senator Arlen Specter was reelected in 2004 as a Republican, and became a Democrat on April 30, 2009. Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut was reelected in 2006 as an independent candidate, and became an Independent Democrat. Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont was elected in 2006 as an Independent.

      Source: https://www.senate.gov/history/partydiv.htm

      • rusticus1773@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You spent all that time typing a reply yet you didn’t even read my source…

        He never had 60 present to overcome the filibuster and only passed ACA because Joe fucking Lieberman was bribed by the insurance industry to remove the public option. You should edit your posts for factual accuracy.

        • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh I read it, written by Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm.

          And if your party member is incapable of voting then he should have resigned a long fucking time ago. That’s on them for not forcing him out. The same way Ruth Bader Ginsburg should have resigned due to her failing health instead of clinging to last vestiges of power.

          I guess you are going to defend Sen. Dianne Feinstein now too, when she incapable of doing her job, but being forced to stay in her position because that’s convientent for Adam Schiff to stay in power.

          • rusticus1773@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Moving the goalposts is a lazy form of debate. Thank you for admitting you were wrong about Obama having a supermajority and should have codified abortion rights.

            I will agree with you that they should have forced Ginsburg out and Feinstein should have been voted out a year ago. But that’s not what you initially claimed (multiple times, I might add).

              • rusticus1773@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                15
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Again with the goalposts. Facts are facts. Admit you were wrong about Obama having a supermajority. Unless you are just being a provocateur, you don’t help your case when you clearly miss the truth and deflect from admitting it.

              • AnonTwo@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                Just gonna call you out for a sec.

                He said Ginsburg and Fenstein, because you said Ginsburg and Feinstein. While the answer to this question could easily be a “yes”, this wasn’t part of the original message. You’re expecting him to bring up things you yourself didn’t.

                • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  And if your party member is incapable of voting then he should have resigned a long fucking time ago.

                  It was.

                  • AnonTwo@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    You’re just arguing in bad faith. We can easily just say yes but if you don’t explicitly bring it up then you’re just trying to find a way to debase the argument. You shouldn’t expect people to answer for people you only bring up after your first argument didn’t give you the results you wanted.

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Your link literally discredits your own argument. Not enough people to overturn a filibuster…