From 2003 to 2010 the DNC managed to heavily restrict campaign finance large sum donations, until the 5 conservative SCOTUS judges overturned it in Citizens United.
A DNC core platform stance is to undo Citizens United, but it takes 60 senators to update the constitution and there have not been more than 50 in over a decade.
Please they might have that on paper, but I promise you if they had a 60 seat majority, they would find two Democrats to vote with the Republicans to defeat it. Hell you have Republicans in the DNC. That’s right many members with D by their names are secretly Republicans. They are plants. Funny thing is the DNC knows it but doesn’t expell them or call it out.
So no they don’t want to stop taking the money. They just got rid of Hogg and the guy leading the DNC claimed it was because he was hurting his fundraising.
Call their fucking bet, then? You have a party of absolute corruption and a party that hasn’t had a chance to do the things they say they will, the choice seems really clear to me.
Elect 60 (or more) of them to senate for the first time in over 40 years.
If they don’t pass their core policies, then there is no party representing the people and the radicals will have the opportunity to become mainstream and tear it down.
If they do pass campaign finance laws, overturn citizens united, election reform, expand congress, reform the SCOTUS, tax the rich, and public option healthcare or even Medicaid for All: we all win.
That still isn’t enough to cut off Israel, but certainly lessens their power by gutting AIPAC and substantially lowers their support in Congress compared to before.
Democrats HAVE had a chance to do what they promise. Several times. You have to seriously be completely ignorant to recent history if you think all the Democrats need is a majority…
Ahh yes, Democrats proved they won’t do anything, even the few things they could do with a majority, several times over, but noope, what they need is more attempts to do the same thing they’ve failed to do!
From 2003 to 2010 the DNC managed to heavily restrict campaign finance large sum donations, until the 5 conservative SCOTUS judges overturned it in Citizens United.
A DNC core platform stance is to undo Citizens United, but it takes 60 senators to update the constitution and there have not been more than 50 in over a decade.
Please they might have that on paper, but I promise you if they had a 60 seat majority, they would find two Democrats to vote with the Republicans to defeat it. Hell you have Republicans in the DNC. That’s right many members with D by their names are secretly Republicans. They are plants. Funny thing is the DNC knows it but doesn’t expell them or call it out.
So no they don’t want to stop taking the money. They just got rid of Hogg and the guy leading the DNC claimed it was because he was hurting his fundraising.
Call their fucking bet, then? You have a party of absolute corruption and a party that hasn’t had a chance to do the things they say they will, the choice seems really clear to me.
Call their fucking bet, how?
This is seriously some low effort attempt to cover for democrats or an actual delusion?
“They’re not doing anything significant, so let’s vote them all in so they can cry and while while doing nothing significant.”
Actions speak louder than words, popularity stunts are not political actions.
Elect 60 (or more) of them to senate for the first time in over 40 years.
If they don’t pass their core policies, then there is no party representing the people and the radicals will have the opportunity to become mainstream and tear it down.
If they do pass campaign finance laws, overturn citizens united, election reform, expand congress, reform the SCOTUS, tax the rich, and public option healthcare or even Medicaid for All: we all win.
That still isn’t enough to cut off Israel, but certainly lessens their power by gutting AIPAC and substantially lowers their support in Congress compared to before.
Please enlighten us. What does “calling their bet” look like?
They’re still one of two major parties in a two party system.
Electing 60 of them to the senate for the first time since 1979.
Democrats HAVE had a chance to do what they promise. Several times. You have to seriously be completely ignorant to recent history if you think all the Democrats need is a majority…
I will repeat, electing 60 of them to the senate for the first time since 1979.
Ahh yes, Democrats proved they won’t do anything, even the few things they could do with a majority, several times over, but noope, what they need is more attempts to do the same thing they’ve failed to do!
Do you know the definition of insanity?
What is it you think they could have done but didn’t?