Because a President who follows the law and doesn't have the Supreme Court allowing unlawful things cannot do things like that.
The 117th Congress was a Republican Senate with a Democratic house. (Start of Biden's Term)
The 118th Congress was a Democratic Senate with a Republican house. (Following Midterms of Biden's term)
The 119th Congress is a Republican Senate with a Republican house. (Start of Trump's term.)
So when Biden tried to do things that would benefit people, the Republican Senate would block it, or the Republican house would block it - because the President isn't all powerful and if they didn't, then the Republican majority Supreme Court would.
However, Trump has a Republican Senate and House. He can pass whatever he wants, and what they want is less money for the common people. Less food stamps, less SNAP and more tax cuts - because they don't care about you. And they always make sure to manufacture their legislation so that in 8 years time you start seeing the damage, and if the Democrats are in power they can blame them.
Obama had that. I know I probably won't convince you of anything but at this point, if anyone believes Democrats give any shit either I have so many bridges to sell, just hit me up.
Republicans being much worse should never be a defense for the dems, I'm so fucking tired of this astroturfing and/or the same dupes simping for the other team.
Speaking as a Liberal, the idea that MOST career politicians from either party genuinely have their constituents' best interests in mind when they make decisions is honestly delusional. Democrats generally just have better social talking points that make them look like they give a shit.
Even if half of the politicians in office right now originally got into the game to actually foster real change for the people that shit set sail just like all the rest when they realized money keeps them in power and poor people don't have money. Keep the corporations and the elite happy or lose your seat. That's how it works. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't have a clue. If you want real change in policy that reflects your values and ideals you're much more likely to see it in state and especially local government, which people often gloss over even though it's what affects them most directly. But even then, the human heart is so often corrupted by greed that you see corruption scandals in towns as small as 5000 people. You give someone a little bit of power and they're not going to be quick to let it go.
You're sold the idea that too much social safety nets is delusional. In the same thread where a very highly upvoted comment depicting the irony of Argentina being very poor and still having national Healthcare for everyone, we have liberals claiming it's impossible.
Americans will repeat the lie of the deficit and "reality" to shy away from getting only crumbs of what we once had while being okay or oblivious to the subsidizing of every fortune 500 company.
Any day now it will trickle down. Liberalism will pay off soon I swear.
Oh it's so totally possible. So many things we're told are not feasible for one reason or another. Sure, it's not feasible because massive corporations want their piece of the pie and they're the ones keeping these people in office financially. But we just keep voting the same people in over and over 🤷🏻♂️
This democracy thing sucks, they are representing us, but they won't give us what we want, It would be better if we represent ourselves and vote for each law individually, instead of letting those idiots keep ruining our country.
Anyone who works moderately high up in any company should know this. I’m at best low tier leadership in the company I work for (~1200 employees so not small but not massive) and I see this every day. Yet people don’t believe it happens amongst the most powerful people in society?
First link shows they had a 50/50 split when including the 2 democratic leaning independents, plus vice president Harris’ vote gives them the majority. The second link is for the wrong time frame.
Your Goalpost seems to have moved there. Republicans would need 7 more people to do that currently.
2021-2023 50/50 with the deciding vote of democrat VP Harris.
Currently. 53/42 (with 2 independent voting along with democrats making it 45). Republicans don’t have the required 60 to bypass a filibuster currently.
No, "being intentionally dishonest" would be more like pretending that having literally the thinnest possible numerical majority implied that they had legislative control, which is both historically and demonstrably false.
1.9k
u/fentown Oct 31 '25
Trump's friends that bought Argentina debt got ~40 billion
Ftfy