you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 1 day ago (7 children)

I think the inherent problem is that there is no real way to overturn a presidential veto without winning a super majority vote in Congress.

Since Trump is termed out and is officially in his lame duck period, there's not a whole lot of leverage to force him to behave in any particular way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    “Now, Democrats must deliver,” the progressive senator wrote, urging her party to push Trump to live up to his vow to work with Democrats in the new Congress. “We should force him to do that on the affordability and corruption issues that drove this election—or call his bluff.”

    Warren is stating Democrats need to mandate the fuck up and pass the policies, that the American people want, send it on it's way to Trump and the Republicans and dare them to veto it.

    The fact that Trump will veto it or that the Republicans won't vote for the override don't matter to Warren and what we progressives have been saying this entire time. Just do it, show you are delivering, and then tell the story loud and proud that you pass the law and Republicans told the American people no, stop giving a fuck about what Republicans will do and just do you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Just do it, show you are delivering, and then tell the story loud and proud that you pass the law and Republicans told the American people no, stop giving a fuck about what Republicans will do and just do you.

    Right.... But we're pretending that Democrats haven't attempted to do this in the past. The problem is that the constituents of the DNC actually hold their representatives accountable candidates the constituents of the RNC tend to not give a shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    There is plenty of leverage, the democrats refuse to play hardball. Idk how the democratic voters came to think they can't play hardball politics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (3 children)

    the democrats refuse to play hardball.

    What exactly would that entail? What kind of hard ball would effectively overturn or prevent an executive veto?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    For instance, relocating military bases in their state and moving them elsewhere. There are a lot of things they can do, the dems refuse to do them, the red states get more in fed taxes than they pay in, and the dem states are donor states, and our politicians don't change it back, it always ratchets to the repubs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 13 hours ago (1 child)

    First of all, that would be insanely expensive. Secondly that's not going to prevent the executive from vetoing bills, it's not like trump actually cares about red states.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 12 hours ago

    Reapportioning federal spending is indeed how to play politics. The republicans do it, and "our" democrats don't.

    Your refutation falls on deaf ears here, as if we had no levers to change the fact that blue states pay more in taxes, and red states get more than they pay, and the dems don't EVER even try to change it back.

  • source
  • parent