- 811 Posts
- 1.17K Comments
6·1 day agoIt matters more than you might think even if Republicans generally don’t care about the average person. For instance, in 2023 due to push-back there ended up being enough republican support (~100) to get the 2/3 needed to expel George Santos despite republicans having a super slim majority in the house
Or they already dropped Matt Gatez as their AG pick because of the push back from Republicans in the senate
It matters especially on the house side this time as well where they started with a three seat majorities and will be at 1 seat majority until special elections in April. Only a handful of republican defections is enough to kill a bill
Keep in mind that as we look at things now, many of Republicans policies are deeply unpopular even among many Republican voters. For instance, Project 2025 has only a 4% approval rating, 57% disapproval
There is a disconnect between what people think they are voting for and what they are actually voting for. It’s a launching off point to change things from. Many people really did think he would lower prices. If Trump goes through with plans on steep Tarrifs their support will hardly be so vocal for him
Look at Bush 2004 to - economy crashing - and then Obama 2008
Lets also look at other areas that we tend to think of as linear forms of progress that really weren’t - like the civil rights era. There were serious regressions during Jim Crow and things took a long time to get better, but the leaders who made progress didn’t give up and were able to get a lot through
The Plessy v Ferguson ruling was in the 1896. The NAACP started going after different underpinnings of it piece by piece in the 1930s. It took until the 1950s for them to start getting serious wins undermining the Plessy ruling - suggesting that it could fully be overturned which it was in 1954
Support isn’t binary, and it’s something you can build and increase
Fights like this aren’t fully won or lost on short term time scales
2·6 days agoIs there plenty of voter suppression, certainly, not all to the but to the extent that elections are unwinnable at all yet
There is still room to fight even if the conditions are not what they should be
I mean in Odessa Texas this December, Dems won a city council seat with in a district that voted 70% for Trump. And the dem who won was also gay too - and still won in that super trump heavy district
241·6 days agoIt’s also worth noting that dem house leadership spoke against it explicitly too. For instance, Hakeem Jefferies, the Dem House Minority Leader, wrote against it before the vote too
The House Republican Child Predator Empowerment Act does not promote fairness and safety in sports.
It will unleash horrific child predators on girls and young women throughout America.
Unacceptable.
https://bsky.app/profile/hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social/post/3lfpl3s35v22s
The Dem House Whip, Whip Clark, made similar remarks on the house floor
While I am here, I will say to make sure to contact your senators on HR 28, regardless of party, so they know how strongly people feel about it and ensure it doesn’t get past the senate filibuster. It can make more of a difference than you might think
I disagree that it’s only elected representatives that can fight. We the people can, even if that’s just pressuring our elected officials to do the right thing. Enough pushback does change votes and actions
We can vote in local and statewide race. There are some local races in 2025 in Texas and other states
We can run for office ourselves for local and statewide elections too. There’s groups like Run for Something that help progressives run and make sure no seat goes unchallenged
We can organize unions to protect our labor rights
and so on
Yes, we won’t win every fight, but we can still block a lot of horrible things
Yep it is good news, especially given that Paxton ran a whole pressure campaign on Republicans and yet wasn’t able to get it through
Also is reminder that we can resist the far right if and when we fight
What are Dems supposed to do here exactly that they’re not already doing. Please elaborate with specifics because I am very very tired of comments like this without any specific critiques. The title isn’t reflecting what they are doing. They aren’t boycotting, they are specifically trying to block republicans from doing anything until the special election where the chamber will become tied
They are already getting in the mud a bit here by trying to stop the session until the special election. They have made a lot of moves here to block Republicans. They swore in dems early so that they could block quorum and they did so in secret to catch Republicans off gaurd, Gov Tim Walz called the special election as soon as possible despite republicans trying to push the date further out, they had the Democratic secretary of state declare no quorum was met so that they have great merit for legal challenges if republicans try and ignore the law, etc.
Edit: also the Minnesota Secretary of State just came out and said they intend to file suit to challange Republicans ignoring his declaration of no quorum and adjournment
Burrows (R-Lubbock) emerged as the “establishment” candidate, favored by representatives who have long served in the Legislature and are willing to work with their Democratic counterparts—a notable difference from Cook, who supported not appointing any Democrats to positions of power within the legislative body’s committees.
The texas state house has 83 Republicans and 67 Democrats for reference
12·7 days agoArticle seems to suggest that the government might be trying to make these plans without ByteDance’s knowledge
It’s unclear whether ByteDance knows about the Chinese government’s plans and TikTok and Musk’s involvement in the discussions, the report said. Senior Chinese officials are debating contingency plans involving TikTok’s future in the U.S. as part of larger discussions about working with President-elect Donald Trump, the report added.
A TikTok spokesperson said in an email to CNBC, “We can’t be expected to comment on pure fiction.” X didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
8·10 days agoSome platforms might be redeemable and worth that fight, others I fear are beyond saving in their current form
There’s an algorithmic component here though that is going to make anything like that extremely uphill
Meta has to want to follow Musks as example explicitly. If he look at Musk, that’s a worrying trajectory. Elon Musk specifically boosts his own posts on Twitter over others even if you don’t follow him. He downranks anything with the word cisgender. He boosts accounts that pay him for checkmarks and has taken those checkmarks away from people who criticize him
12·10 days agoHelpful links on how to delete stuff that’s meta owned
Permanently Delete Your Facebook Account
He already was found guilty on 34 counts by a jury in May. This is about his sentencing
That’s not what the article said. Read the next paragraph. They vote to let it go to the floor where they plan to vote against it there
Voting to print the bill means we have the chance to debate it, challenge it, and vote against it on the record with our colleagues
States laws will matter a hell of a lot. When roe was overturned things immediately fell to the states. That’s the most likely way the court would overturn gay marriage should they go for it
In terms of trans rights that is unfortunately more true lately, yes, though historically any transphobic dems have lost their primaries. We can and should challenge there again
Democrats have made serious effort to codify a lot of marriage equality at state and federal level specifically to try to push back against this kind of stuff
For instance, the federal resepct for marriage act
RFMA officially repealed DOMA and requires the federal government to recognize same-sex and interracial marriages, codifying parts of Obergefell, the 2013 ruling in United States v. Windsor, and the 1967 ruling in Loving v. Virginia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respect_for_Marriage_Act
State level intatives have removed bans from many state laws and constitutions such as California
Democrats in Virginia are trying to pass constitutional ammendments to remove it right now that they have a majority in both chambers. They removed bans from the state law already
And so on
Stop with the “both sides” here
Edit: and to clarify if you were reading only the pull quote, the very next paragraph is about how they are voting against this resolution when it gets to the floor
Nope, they are already talking about finding a dem to fill the seat
Story’s main headline doesn’t really capture the gist very well, and this post gave a much better summary
I added the direct link of the story to the body
They are already pointing out how it’s a distraction. The media just gives all the preference towards hearing Trump, so you didn’t hear them calling him out
Everyday Americans are fed up with the high cost of living.
Stop the foolishness about Greenland, Panama or the Gulf of Mexico.
Let’s solve the problems that matter.
https://bsky.app/profile/hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social/post/3lfasm4akss2c
What does renaming the Gulf of Mexico have to do with lowering the cost of living in America?
Absolutely nothing.
https://bsky.app/profile/hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social/post/3lf66dkh2uc24
5% isn’t often but it does happen - even if it has to take a lot of pushback to happen. For one example of a plan modified to be a bit less bad after pushback
U.S. Senator Rick Scott on Friday revised his plan to end all federal programs after five years to exclude the popular Social Security and Medicare programs, after enduring weeks of mounting criticism from Democrats and his fellow Republicans.
[…]
While Scott’s plan did not directly call for an end to the Social Security and Medicare plans for older Americans, it had not specifically excluded them until he changed his position on Friday.
Good, I’m glad it’s resonating with people. It’s a good reminder to not let yourself become victim to the hopeless that they want you to have. We can fight and we will fight
We don’t have to win every battle to turn the tides