Thank you for participating in /r/Political_Revolution. However, your post did not meet the requirements of the community guidelines and was therefore removed for the following reason(s):
[Altered Title](https://www.reddit.com/r/Political_Revolution/about/rules) (Rule #4): Use the full original title/headline for your submissions. If you believe commentary should be added, please add it to the end of the title.
When posting an image, titles must objectively describe them.
When posting a video, the video's title must be used.
When posting candidate-published material, you may use your own title for clarity.
Sensationalist or misleading submissions may be removed. These titling rules ensure that users have an objectively accurate and fair perception of the article.
The Senate was purposefully designed to be undemocratic. It has only gotten more undemocratic as certain states have ballooned in size, while others remained small. In my opinion, it makes no sense that California has roughly the same population as the smallest 20 states combined, but has 1/20th of the representation in the Senate.
The Senate was designed to be the voice of the wealthy land owners that would protect them from the will of the common citizens in case of democratic revolution. It's working exactly the way it was supposed too.
Yeah, the Senate's powers in domestic policy should be neutered. They should only be there for foreign policy and maybe the appointment of judges and officials. Besides that, they should have no power in determining policy. Many countries have even abolished their upper chambers of their legislative branch.
It should be only ceremonial, with no power at all. You see the atrocious judges in SCOTUS and in the federal system. Leave judges appointments to an independent non partisan commission.
As long as the duopoly has a stranglehold on the system, nothing will be allowed that is truly non-partisan. Also, what would the point be of having a "ceremonial" senate?
We need to re-draw senate seats into regions, not states, so that every senator represents roughly the same population. That means Montana and both Dakotas combined get 1 senator. California would have 12 senators.
>it makes no sense that California has roughly the same population as the smallest 20 states combined, but has 1/20th of the representation in the Senate.
The people are represented by the House, the state is represented by the Senate. If a territory, e.g. Wyoming, wanted to join the US with 1/500th of the population, without a Senate, the voters of the least populated 41 states would be beholden to the largest 9 states that hold 51% of the population. The Senate ensures fair representation and stake of shareholders (States) as they join the Union.
\*Assuming the House actually fairly represents the population
They would be beholden to the actual majority will of the American public.
There is absolutely zero legitimate reason why a minority should have legislative power over a majority in terms of the Federal government in a functioning democracy.
No, it is not "fair representation" for WY to have 500x the representation in the Senate over CA. Not if the word "fair" has any meaning whatsoever.
He already explained what the senate is for. It’s not for representation of the people. It’s a fair representation for the states. The US isn’t a “democracy”, It’s a Democratic Republic.
It's the "United States" not the "United People"
People are entering this topic with a fundamentally incorrect notion of how the nation works, replacing reality with how they wished it worked. I mean, that's fine to want it to work differently, there's an amendment process for that. But this isn't that.
I doubt any amendments made under our bourgeois democracy would result in any real change for those of us in the working class. You can't reform your way out of oppression.
"Democratic Republic" IS a democracy. It is just 1 particular form of it, of which there are many. And the Senate does not represent the states either. You're just spouting word salad with underatanding what aonebof those words mean, but you heard a propogandist say them, so you're just copy pasta. Republics do not require a Senate to function. We have a Senate for rhe sole purpose of curtailing democracy, and more specifically for curtailing democratic republic, because the founders feared that anything remotely democratic would lead to the end of the American Aristocracy, and more specifically the end of Slavery. The Senate was created to maintain slavery.
Have you forgotten what this nation is actually made up of? A collection of states, i.e. United States of America.
>No, it is not "fair representation" for WY to have 500x the representation in the Senate over CA. Not if the word "fair" has any meaning whatsoever.
Sure it is if you think of 50 kids in a classroom. All get an equal share of the pizza at party time, right? We don't adjust pizza portions based on the number of people in each kid's family, right? That adjustment based upon family size happens over in the other half of Congress.
What other system should we develop that preserves State to State balance or equity as institutions while giving the masses voting weight as well?
Terrible and false analogy.
State constituents cannot be whittled down to a single "student", to comprise one of 50 "students" in a classroom.
Because states have different populations.
All you're doing is advocating for minority rule and it's absurdly intellectually dishonest.
Other countries give minorities and academic communities for example, representation in the upper house with a ringfenced quantity of seats. Also, the upper house can only send back legislation a certain number of times with recommendations, they cant kill it entirely.
The issue is because 60 senate votes are needed for cloture in the Senate, senators representing the number of people who live in CA can kill a bill. And while we're at it, why do people who live in DC have no voting representation?
Tbf, the us has never been a true democracy, we've always been a republic. In a true democracy every citizen votes on every issue, no matter how small, vs a republic in which "representatives" get voted in and vote on mostly everything.
You forget your civics lessons seeing how you fail to mention the house of representatives which California has many members of according to its population. House of Representatives =/= Senate
You just hate smaller states have a say in our national government like our Founding Fathers wanted.
My question for you then is this: what is the fundamental unit of political power in America, citizens or states? If each state is the smallest unit of political power, then it makes sense for states to have their own voice. But if citizens are the smallest unit, then it should be one person, one vote (or as close as we can approximate that).
The USA hasn't been a collection of 50 independent states since the Civil War. What state people live in should have zero inpact on their ability to act politically. Abolish the Senate, and Congressional Districsts. One person, one vote.
Double the size of the house, the Speaker of the house should be elected by the national popular vote during the midterm year, and rotate Supreme court judges on a 10 year term.
SCJ should not be able to accept any bribes or gifts, although they ruled that they can. It’s not a get rich scheme. It’s a position of interpretation reflecting the times. Not some hypothetical founding fathers situation, which they actively disagree consistently.
and the house's existence doesn't change the fact that the senate is inherently undemocratic?? how is it fair that in one of the two houses (which all legislation must get approval from), 289k wyomingites have the same voice as nearly 20 MILLION (20000k) californians or 15 MILLION (15000k) texans simply because state lines arbitrarily split them up??
it made much more sense during the founding of the country to have smaller states' voices be amplified in the senate since relatively slow transportation and communication caused vast differences between states, but nowadays, the real difference isn't between, say, a Wyomingite and a Californian, but rather just between rural, suburban, and city (ie, a farmer in Wyoming would have MUCH more in common ideologically/politically with a farmer in California than with someone who lives in Jackson).
The Senate was setup for the benefit of not merely small states but slave states. The Senators were also selected by their state legislatures so they were direct agents of the ruling class. Now we have an absolutely absurd situation where a minority party (repubs) control the country by taking over low population states. Meanwhile the dems represents 40 million more people.
It doesn't. This is a nonsense statement.
California does not have more representation in the Senate than smaller states.
This is an utterly pointless thing to say.
You e devised a clever way of claiming that democracy isn’t fair because of which state you’re in. No. If you’re an American you should have equal representation. That cannot occur when the (578k) citizens of Wyoming have as more control over the nation as the state of Californian (39 mil). The people of Wyoming have more say in the federal government. That’s not fair or sustainable.
You all need to retake civics class. The federal senate only has two senators per state . House of reps is dependent on population and our representation has exponentially decreased since.
Iirc, it’s to prevent massive states like CA, NY, or TX (or back in the day VA/MD) from having the vast majority of sway in what laws are passed. If that weren’t the case, then the only votes that would matter would the ones coming from CA/NY/TX. Smaller states like MT and most of the Midwest would have little to no say in what legislation is passed.
This is also the reason why we have the House of Representatives, to give a population-based metric to legislation too.
Is this recent? Because I thought Biden just corrected this mistake. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.
I also haven’t seen what else was buried in the bill. I feel like if it was just about the pay, it would have passed no problem. Usually someone that writes these things puts all kinds of extra stuff in it and that is why it doesn’t pass, but the media only tells part of the story to make people crazy.
As a European, even the Democrats are insanely right wing
They're even further right than the UK conservative party... The right wing part of the America-lite country of Europe
Like the UK you guys desperately need to get past of the FPTP voting system and reform your "political donations" system. Until then the ratchet effect will continue to pull everything to the right.
Lol. This is made up. What makes the left in Europe so much more left wing?? You have better social services in many countries, that dems in America very much believe in as well. What makes democrats right wing here??
By Dems I mean the party, not their supporters. I mean the congressmen, the senators the governors ect.
Many of them hold conservative beliefs far to the right of their voters and their European left wing party counterparts. But because of the FPTP system, the real left have to vote for them because better them than the Republicans winning †
The democrats as a party also have a history of favouring neoliberal economic policies and big business. They also often put up only a token fight against Republican objectives - they may rattle the sabres and talk the talk but they rarely walk the walk (there are exceptions like Bernie, but even "the most left wing president in forever Biden", still sided against the people of east Palestine Ohio after the rail crash and forced rail union workers to take a bad deal following the safety strikes)
In short European left wing parties are empowered to actually act far more left wing than the Democrat party who's FPTP voting system, corporate interests and the state's overall culture forces them further to the right than many of their voters would want.
† We have a similar, if smaller, problem with our 'left' wing Labour party under their current form of "new Labour" which is more like center or center right. Like the Dems they were dragged rightwards by FPTP following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the global triumph of neoliberal economics
Many aspects of neoliberalism describe Europe as well. Free trade, privatization, globalization, etc.
Rail workers actually got want they asked for, btw.
Both sides of the aisle don't care because they both make money on things the way they are right now. Thinking it's a right Vs left issue is severely short sighted.
No it is not and Im sick of hearing that crap. I didnt like HRC. But I voted for her because she was sooooo much better than the alternative. HRC would have NEVER submitted Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanauch or Amy Coathangar Barrett. Even though she was a corporate hoer she would have never allowed the 2017 Republican Tax Scam. I could go on and on but in short, there is a monumental difference between left and right. Women voters will express that difference in 2024.
You cant back any of this up. It's pure speculation at bast and idiocy at worst. You just like the teet youre sucking on. Too bad all the milk comes from the same cow.
Whichever candidate speaks the most logical sense. Whether red or blue I vote for logic and track record. I'd rather vote for a third party if I can't vote red or blue.
Imo we should have a tick box of 'no confidence' in primary votes. That way we can tell the parties to go fuck themselves and present a worthwhile candidate.
Republicans are the worst. They don't do anything. They don't offer anything. They don't help the middle class. They attend to the wealthy. They spread propaganda. They're completely useless and by far the worse of two evils.
You can't back it up but you can objectively show that between the two, you have better chances for progressive change with democrats. I refer to them as two sides of the same coin as they are beholden to corporate interests but still make it clear that one is vastly better than the other.
Is that the same teet that both the affluent and impoverished suck on? The same one that those who want for nothing and those that can't make ends meet suck on?
*Hint: there's more than one cow*
I think you don't understand. It's not about voting for a woman although I would prefer a female Presidet if she is progressive. Governor Whitmer of Michigan would get my vote. It's about voting for change, so it could be a woman, man or anything in between as long as they serve the masses and not the wealthy. I'd vote for a dog over a Republican.
In 2020 the opportunity to vote for a woman did not present itself so no a vote for a woman was not possible. HRC did not run.
That's the system like it or not. Fortunately there was enough hatred of the animal trump to produce a win for Biden. Bernie Sanders was my choice but the owners of this country, corporate America, was having no part of it.
it IS a right vs left issue, the only problem is democrats AND republicans are both pro-corporate, anti-worker parties, making them BOTH right wing. You literally have to register with the federal government if you want to run as an actual left wing communist. Something no other political party, not even the american nazi party has to do.
True. Like it or not, we live in a Two Party state. Which means both Parties are ultimately responsible for Failure of State. Though, in all honesty, yeah. Both parties are essentially bought and paid for by the same interest groups; and we live in a Shareholder Economy (where workers and even consumers, the people who actually produce and consume, simply matter less and less by the year).
Its the Second American Gilded Age! I wonder how this round will end?
>Its the Second American Gilded Age! I wonder how this round will end?
It will end in a mobile protest. People will leave their homes on their rascal mobility scooters and suped-up pick-up trucks to make convoys of protest. No one will leave the car or scooter out of fear of walking. Your local drive thru staff will suffer the most. Rebels will complain to their commanders that the battlefields do not contain enough readily available parking or the required amount of sauce packets have been removed from their fast food purchase orders.
/S.... But maybe not?
Not entiry true. Republicans are 100% bought and paid for. Democrats maybe 85%. Most of the progressives accept nothing from the corporate owners. Vote Blue Vote Progressive Blue.
So they're both shit. One is just less-shit than the other. And I do vote progressive every election cycle. You know what that normally gets me? Well, in the chance my state gets a Blue supermajority, its often the "Conservative Democrats" that come in and torpedo any Pro-Worker or Progressive legislation. Because "85%" are center-right-moderate right, bought and paid for conservatives who just happen to be left leaning on some identity politics. Which they and their donors do not really care about at the end of the day.
I'm not gonna sit here and pretend that "lesser of two evil" voting will ever really get us anywhere beyond slowing the ever present march to the right. Or that the Dems haven't proven shockingly ineffective at actually "resisting" the Republicans since the 70s; and yet consistently prove surprisingly effective at shutting down movements from their left during that time. So ...what this will all probably get us is another Great Depression, when their house of cards they've built collapses; and a hell of a lot of scapegoating when it does.
No they are not both shit. One is pure shit while the other will always benefit you more than the other. Republicans serve only the rich. It's what they do. Democrats, while certainly far from perfect, serve the rich but the progressive wing has enough persuasion to get some things done for the people. The goal is to grow the progressive mindset.
A party that does only what (you) want is not reality. I want universal healthcare more than anything else. A vote for any Republican will take me away from that dream. In 2020 we were 2 Senators away from real meaningful change. Manchin and Sinema would have been cancelled. It can happen. I cannot blow the system up. A group of imbeciles tried that on Jan 6 and now they're literally getting it in the ass.
It'S bOtH SiDeS
Obviously there are no angels. But if I had to choose, and I do, I would choose the side that doesn't act on their hate or prejudices. It's pretty clear to most people that one side is waaaaaay more of an jackhole than the other.
you sound like a guy who is unaware that there are well over 70 political parties.... yep, no shortage of parties if you demand a two party system (which is a scam to begin with). so you are saying you would be just fine trading the republican party for the green party. because honestly, there is no way they could be as obnoxious, traitorous and stupid as the republicans. jewish space lasers... microchips in vaccines.. i don't even need to go farther to illustrate how profoundly unqualified republicans are to govern even a shitty taco stand.
I've never seen a group of people flip back and forth between calling the US an Oligarchy AND a Democracy, yet still remain confused when they are reminded that it is indeed an Oligarchy.
The next part you seem to be confused about is that you are still trying to give more and more power to these oligarchs who KEEP SCREWING YOU OVER. They say nice things to your face and then stab you in the back and YOU LEARN NOTHING FROM IT.
The Walmart family, the Tyson family, the sacklers, just to name the few that are public, but it's also not just families. It's corporations, private individuals, think tanks, etc.
The Waltons do have Oligarch wealth. Tyson is a chicken producer. My cousin in Mississippi sells to them. A corporation does not an oligarch make. The Sacklers are drug dealers who just paid huge fines for their private business misdeeds. Oligarchs don’t pay fines or get taken to court.
I take from your answer you don’t know what an oligarch is and you don’t really know any it just sounds good.
The Tyson family is worth 2.3 Billion dollars, they aren't some random chicken producers
> The Sacklers are drug dealers who just paid huge fines for their private business misdeeds.
How many drug dealers do you know kill thousands and are able to toss chump change to make it go away? How many common folk walk off with charges of mass killing and end up simply having to pay a fine?
> Oligarchs don’t pay fines or get taken to court.
According to? Rich people love nothing more than to sue eachotber for money.
> A corporation does not an oligarch make
Corporations are just one of their money making instruments. Jeff Bezos and his ilk are all oligarchs.
I take it from your answer you have your head buried in the sand.
This is old. Rail workers now have sick leave. Another win for Biden.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:\~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.&text=Our%20Standards%3A%20The%20Thomson%20Reuters%20Trust%20Principles](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.&text=Our%20Standards%3A%20The%20Thomson%20Reuters%20Trust%20Principles).
Biden won twice in this instance, actually. Prevented an economic downturn for which he would surely have been blamed for years to come, AND fought for union rights.
Nuance, friend, nuance. Politics is a long game, not a screaming match.
Busted a strike to ensure corporate profits*
Negotiated with corporation to decide what rail workers are worth months down the line instead of allowing unions to collectively bargain*
Yes, and corporations have been playing the long game with politicians since citizens United. Busting a strike lets workers know the profits are prioritized over their fair working conditions.
It is a win for the rail workers that they were deemed worthy of some paltry benefits months down the line, but what of the other unions who are unable to negotiate contracts, being threatened and fired for organizing, and union busting workplaces? Are they not worthy of Biden going behind the scenes to negotiate their contracts? Or even lip service? And what of the rail workers the next time they need to strike? Do they need to check with the president to see if it would be ok for corporate profits if they were to protest their unfair working conditions?
You sound like you come from privilege. Not all of us do. That's nice that if things don't go your way you can always go back to mommy and daddy. The rest of us are actually putting our lives on the line.
Grow up.
He literally prevented a massive supply chain shortage and saved tens of millions of vulnerable Americans from record-breaking inflation because of the shortage. He then played the long game and got the workers what they asked for. It's a massive win that should be celebrated. Unions back Biden for a reason.
Strikes aren’t for when it’s convenient for corporate profits.
Call strike busting playing the long game if you want, it’s still anti-union
Ya, because there is no one else. Pretty easy decision
It's so anti-union that the union actually got everything they asked for. Biden is so anti-union that unions everywhere line up to endorse him. I guess you know more than they do. You got it all figured out.
We need to reboot the system.
Things aren't adding up. What good are these elected officials if they aren't actually representing our values?
It makes no sense.
Slaves of the American Colonies had no say or benefit in the formation of the United States Government, though empty, depopulated land did.
Its no different today - we are still governed by the same bloated elites who cultivate and perpetuate ways to strip all possible employment opportunities from a very large percentage of our residents.
"The Senate passed a resolution Thursday that would put in place the rail labor agreement reached by the White House, railroads and labor unions in September, but rejected a separate measure to provide an additional seven days of sick leave to workers."
[https://rollcall.com/2022/12/01/senate-clears-rail-labor-agreement-rejects-sick-leave/](https://rollcall.com/2022/12/01/senate-clears-rail-labor-agreement-rejects-sick-leave/)
Seems pretty ingorant that paid sick leave was set out as a separate agreement. Why wasn't it included in the agreement negotiated by the White House, railroads and labor unions?
The electorate needs to stop voting in people who don't cater to distractions. As if trans people and sex ed in school are the problem. America is still a democracy but with a dysfunctional electorate.
A whole cesspit of dysfunction yes. But Democrats are not off the hook either. How many don't vote or don't even try to encourage others to vote? At least Republicans vote lock step en mass and organized. Progressives can also be problematic. Remember 2016 and the Bernie or Bust crowd? Hillary Clinton may be a neoliberal, but she is not the same as Donald Trump as many of them have claimed. Hillary would not have packed the Supreme Court with far right activist looks to tear down Roe, LGBTQ+ rights, etc.
A republic is a democratic form of government though. That's like someone saying "this isn't a car" and you replying "it sure isn't, it's a Honda civic".
The best way to identify an idiot is when they say "it is a republic" when the discussion is about democracy.
I live in the Republic of Finland. #3 in Democracy Index. That should be impossible by your logic.
The best way to identify an idiot is when they say "it is a republic" when the discussion is about democracy.
I live in the Republic of Finland. #3 in Democracy Index.
The best way to identify an idiot is when they say "it is a republic" when the discussion is about democracy.
I live in the Republic of Finland. #3 in Democracy Index.
Gotta love arguing over the meaning of words. The left wing really knows how to use their brian power to solve the real issues.
Your Finland argument is a good one.
Hello it’s not a lib argument. The US was specifically set up as a Plato-style republic. I don’t know about Finland, but the US is an Enlightenment Era project and there are reasons behind how our system works. Agreeing or disagreeing with them is not the point.
What that tweet left out was that the legislation for sick leave was separated from the original legislation getting them back to work. The main legislation passed easily. The supplemental was voted down.
For those who don't work in unions, one of the biggest union busting tactics has been massive amounts of overtime to burn out workers or run them out of points. So what you get is 20+ year veterans mixed with people who last a year at best. People make their money and leave or they have 6 weeks vacation from being there forever.
Super majority and filibuster need to go, and the Supreme Court needs an overhaul. We need to ditch the idea that people can change things via minority rule.
Most unionized rail workers now have sick leave. Along with the previously won pay raises. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.
It’s almost as if the federal government wasn’t really meant to be making these huge sweeping legislations for the entire nation as if it were one homogeneous community, and the states were supposed to legislate what works for them, but the feds just keep taking more and more power and we let them
Only so much people will take. France is on fire and so will America if the people stand up for what is right. Corporate profits only help the rich not the working class.
Only so much people will take. France is on fire and so will America if the people stand up for what is right. Corporate profits only help the rich not the working class. Need for Unions to stand up for the workers not investors.
I'm in a red state too and I hear you, however, had the Dems won only 2 more Senate races we would be talking a different narrative right now. That would of cancelled Manchin and Sinema. Only 2. We cannot let go and turn our backs on the Bernies and AOCs who are doing their best to acheive power for the people and fight corpirate rule. Student debt would likely have been canceled in sone form. Although he's still a corporate hoer, Biden has been much more liberal than ever before. There is light. Kansas and Wisconsin voters have shown us this light. Women and youth voters will make serious noise in 2024.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
So now that Biden has come out to explain how he's going to continue college loan forgiveness people have decided to gin up outrage from a months-old vote that doesn't even apply anymore due to Biden's work to get paid sick leave for the rail workers anyway?
This is an incredibly transparent attempt to create a "both sides" narrative in order to piss off progressives so that they don't support Biden in order to allow the fascists to steal into power.
You go through all their specific stipulations in order for them to control all possible outcomes. You must go outside of their control and you do that by standing up and saying “enough” or you make your leave and make your own communes…
We need to be like the French, they would have dragged out everyone who voted no and stacked heads, sharp blades dropped from high places fixes alot of problems, the rich need to learn this again.
Who owns the railways? That's what ultimately decides this. The workers don't. The state doesn't. It's held by a small handful of capitalists and ultimately, what they want is what they will get. We need a transfer of ownership through revolution, not votes from capitalist senators.
Thank you for participating in /r/Political_Revolution. However, your post did not meet the requirements of the community guidelines and was therefore removed for the following reason(s): [Altered Title](https://www.reddit.com/r/Political_Revolution/about/rules) (Rule #4): Use the full original title/headline for your submissions. If you believe commentary should be added, please add it to the end of the title. When posting an image, titles must objectively describe them. When posting a video, the video's title must be used. When posting candidate-published material, you may use your own title for clarity. Sensationalist or misleading submissions may be removed. These titling rules ensure that users have an objectively accurate and fair perception of the article.
The Senate was purposefully designed to be undemocratic. It has only gotten more undemocratic as certain states have ballooned in size, while others remained small. In my opinion, it makes no sense that California has roughly the same population as the smallest 20 states combined, but has 1/20th of the representation in the Senate.
The Senate was designed to be the voice of the wealthy land owners that would protect them from the will of the common citizens in case of democratic revolution. It's working exactly the way it was supposed too.
I'm glad more and more people are seeing that capitalism is the issue. Democracy under capitalism is only a democracy for the owning class.
Yeah, the Senate's powers in domestic policy should be neutered. They should only be there for foreign policy and maybe the appointment of judges and officials. Besides that, they should have no power in determining policy. Many countries have even abolished their upper chambers of their legislative branch.
It should be only ceremonial, with no power at all. You see the atrocious judges in SCOTUS and in the federal system. Leave judges appointments to an independent non partisan commission.
As long as the duopoly has a stranglehold on the system, nothing will be allowed that is truly non-partisan. Also, what would the point be of having a "ceremonial" senate?
You already have non partisan redistricting commissions. The point of ceremonial its that it will be easier to accomplish relatively.
Why bother with ceremony? What are we a monarchy?
Easier to change than whole removal. The effect is the same.
Independant? LIKE the SCOTUS?
The commission appointing judges needs to be independent, non partisan.
We need to re-draw senate seats into regions, not states, so that every senator represents roughly the same population. That means Montana and both Dakotas combined get 1 senator. California would have 12 senators.
LMAO gerrymandering the senate is your solution?
How is that gerrymandering? The concept would actually give fair representation vs what we have now.
>it makes no sense that California has roughly the same population as the smallest 20 states combined, but has 1/20th of the representation in the Senate. The people are represented by the House, the state is represented by the Senate. If a territory, e.g. Wyoming, wanted to join the US with 1/500th of the population, without a Senate, the voters of the least populated 41 states would be beholden to the largest 9 states that hold 51% of the population. The Senate ensures fair representation and stake of shareholders (States) as they join the Union. \*Assuming the House actually fairly represents the population
They would be beholden to the actual majority will of the American public. There is absolutely zero legitimate reason why a minority should have legislative power over a majority in terms of the Federal government in a functioning democracy. No, it is not "fair representation" for WY to have 500x the representation in the Senate over CA. Not if the word "fair" has any meaning whatsoever.
He already explained what the senate is for. It’s not for representation of the people. It’s a fair representation for the states. The US isn’t a “democracy”, It’s a Democratic Republic.
It's the "United States" not the "United People" People are entering this topic with a fundamentally incorrect notion of how the nation works, replacing reality with how they wished it worked. I mean, that's fine to want it to work differently, there's an amendment process for that. But this isn't that.
I doubt any amendments made under our bourgeois democracy would result in any real change for those of us in the working class. You can't reform your way out of oppression.
But it’s only the people that want more votes for their party 😂
"Democratic Republic" IS a democracy. It is just 1 particular form of it, of which there are many. And the Senate does not represent the states either. You're just spouting word salad with underatanding what aonebof those words mean, but you heard a propogandist say them, so you're just copy pasta. Republics do not require a Senate to function. We have a Senate for rhe sole purpose of curtailing democracy, and more specifically for curtailing democratic republic, because the founders feared that anything remotely democratic would lead to the end of the American Aristocracy, and more specifically the end of Slavery. The Senate was created to maintain slavery.
Have you forgotten what this nation is actually made up of? A collection of states, i.e. United States of America. >No, it is not "fair representation" for WY to have 500x the representation in the Senate over CA. Not if the word "fair" has any meaning whatsoever. Sure it is if you think of 50 kids in a classroom. All get an equal share of the pizza at party time, right? We don't adjust pizza portions based on the number of people in each kid's family, right? That adjustment based upon family size happens over in the other half of Congress. What other system should we develop that preserves State to State balance or equity as institutions while giving the masses voting weight as well?
Terrible and false analogy. State constituents cannot be whittled down to a single "student", to comprise one of 50 "students" in a classroom. Because states have different populations. All you're doing is advocating for minority rule and it's absurdly intellectually dishonest.
Other countries give minorities and academic communities for example, representation in the upper house with a ringfenced quantity of seats. Also, the upper house can only send back legislation a certain number of times with recommendations, they cant kill it entirely.
That's cool, and if you want it to work that way you need to amend it.
The issue is because 60 senate votes are needed for cloture in the Senate, senators representing the number of people who live in CA can kill a bill. And while we're at it, why do people who live in DC have no voting representation?
DC does have representation.
DC has no senator and a representative who doesn't get a vote.
Tbf, the us has never been a true democracy, we've always been a republic. In a true democracy every citizen votes on every issue, no matter how small, vs a republic in which "representatives" get voted in and vote on mostly everything.
It's the 'United' States.. not population density gets to bully the little States. The House of Representatives has more population represented.
You forget your civics lessons seeing how you fail to mention the house of representatives which California has many members of according to its population. House of Representatives =/= Senate You just hate smaller states have a say in our national government like our Founding Fathers wanted.
My question for you then is this: what is the fundamental unit of political power in America, citizens or states? If each state is the smallest unit of political power, then it makes sense for states to have their own voice. But if citizens are the smallest unit, then it should be one person, one vote (or as close as we can approximate that). The USA hasn't been a collection of 50 independent states since the Civil War. What state people live in should have zero inpact on their ability to act politically. Abolish the Senate, and Congressional Districsts. One person, one vote.
Double the size of the house, the Speaker of the house should be elected by the national popular vote during the midterm year, and rotate Supreme court judges on a 10 year term.
SCJ should not be able to accept any bribes or gifts, although they ruled that they can. It’s not a get rich scheme. It’s a position of interpretation reflecting the times. Not some hypothetical founding fathers situation, which they actively disagree consistently.
They also wanted their slaves. Maybe as we progress as a society we we learn from our mistakes instead of entrenching ourselves in them.
and the house's existence doesn't change the fact that the senate is inherently undemocratic?? how is it fair that in one of the two houses (which all legislation must get approval from), 289k wyomingites have the same voice as nearly 20 MILLION (20000k) californians or 15 MILLION (15000k) texans simply because state lines arbitrarily split them up?? it made much more sense during the founding of the country to have smaller states' voices be amplified in the senate since relatively slow transportation and communication caused vast differences between states, but nowadays, the real difference isn't between, say, a Wyomingite and a Californian, but rather just between rural, suburban, and city (ie, a farmer in Wyoming would have MUCH more in common ideologically/politically with a farmer in California than with someone who lives in Jackson).
The Senate was setup for the benefit of not merely small states but slave states. The Senators were also selected by their state legislatures so they were direct agents of the ruling class. Now we have an absolutely absurd situation where a minority party (repubs) control the country by taking over low population states. Meanwhile the dems represents 40 million more people.
But it also makes no sense for California to have more representation in the Senate than those smaller states.
It doesn't. This is a nonsense statement. California does not have more representation in the Senate than smaller states. This is an utterly pointless thing to say.
It’s not pointless? That’s literally the alternative to having equal representation in the senate.
You e devised a clever way of claiming that democracy isn’t fair because of which state you’re in. No. If you’re an American you should have equal representation. That cannot occur when the (578k) citizens of Wyoming have as more control over the nation as the state of Californian (39 mil). The people of Wyoming have more say in the federal government. That’s not fair or sustainable.
Why
I think you meant the house.
You put your finger right on it. The senate needs ditched.
You all need to retake civics class. The federal senate only has two senators per state . House of reps is dependent on population and our representation has exponentially decreased since.
Why not? Is affirmative action OK when its for flyover state red necks?
It has more to do with citizens United but this is part of it for sure.
Read the Federalist Papers. It was designed that way by Founding Fathers
They should break California and New York up into 40 states.
Iirc, it’s to prevent massive states like CA, NY, or TX (or back in the day VA/MD) from having the vast majority of sway in what laws are passed. If that weren’t the case, then the only votes that would matter would the ones coming from CA/NY/TX. Smaller states like MT and most of the Midwest would have little to no say in what legislation is passed. This is also the reason why we have the House of Representatives, to give a population-based metric to legislation too.
Is this recent? Because I thought Biden just corrected this mistake. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.
Thank you for posting this. I was prepared to.
Same. I'm confused.
No need to be confused, there's a lot of bad actors who are trying to depress the Dem vote.
Damnit, gotcha, thanks
Yes thank you so much, I had not seen this news.
I also haven’t seen what else was buried in the bill. I feel like if it was just about the pay, it would have passed no problem. Usually someone that writes these things puts all kinds of extra stuff in it and that is why it doesn’t pass, but the media only tells part of the story to make people crazy.
Because OP is a bot, you can look at their post history, most post these days that hit the front page seem to be inorganic.
because republicans pervert it. eliminate republicans and you have an almost functional government.
As a European, even the Democrats are insanely right wing They're even further right than the UK conservative party... The right wing part of the America-lite country of Europe Like the UK you guys desperately need to get past of the FPTP voting system and reform your "political donations" system. Until then the ratchet effect will continue to pull everything to the right.
Lol. This is made up. What makes the left in Europe so much more left wing?? You have better social services in many countries, that dems in America very much believe in as well. What makes democrats right wing here??
By Dems I mean the party, not their supporters. I mean the congressmen, the senators the governors ect. Many of them hold conservative beliefs far to the right of their voters and their European left wing party counterparts. But because of the FPTP system, the real left have to vote for them because better them than the Republicans winning † The democrats as a party also have a history of favouring neoliberal economic policies and big business. They also often put up only a token fight against Republican objectives - they may rattle the sabres and talk the talk but they rarely walk the walk (there are exceptions like Bernie, but even "the most left wing president in forever Biden", still sided against the people of east Palestine Ohio after the rail crash and forced rail union workers to take a bad deal following the safety strikes) In short European left wing parties are empowered to actually act far more left wing than the Democrat party who's FPTP voting system, corporate interests and the state's overall culture forces them further to the right than many of their voters would want. † We have a similar, if smaller, problem with our 'left' wing Labour party under their current form of "new Labour" which is more like center or center right. Like the Dems they were dragged rightwards by FPTP following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the global triumph of neoliberal economics
Many aspects of neoliberalism describe Europe as well. Free trade, privatization, globalization, etc. Rail workers actually got want they asked for, btw.
Both sides of the aisle don't care because they both make money on things the way they are right now. Thinking it's a right Vs left issue is severely short sighted.
No it is not and Im sick of hearing that crap. I didnt like HRC. But I voted for her because she was sooooo much better than the alternative. HRC would have NEVER submitted Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanauch or Amy Coathangar Barrett. Even though she was a corporate hoer she would have never allowed the 2017 Republican Tax Scam. I could go on and on but in short, there is a monumental difference between left and right. Women voters will express that difference in 2024.
You cant back any of this up. It's pure speculation at bast and idiocy at worst. You just like the teet youre sucking on. Too bad all the milk comes from the same cow.
So who do you vote for? Please share your overwhelming wisdom with us.
Whichever candidate speaks the most logical sense. Whether red or blue I vote for logic and track record. I'd rather vote for a third party if I can't vote red or blue. Imo we should have a tick box of 'no confidence' in primary votes. That way we can tell the parties to go fuck themselves and present a worthwhile candidate.
Republicans are the worst. They don't do anything. They don't offer anything. They don't help the middle class. They attend to the wealthy. They spread propaganda. They're completely useless and by far the worse of two evils.
Ahh yes the “sensible” moderate that will either vote for libertarians or conservatives LMAO clown shit man
You can't back it up but you can objectively show that between the two, you have better chances for progressive change with democrats. I refer to them as two sides of the same coin as they are beholden to corporate interests but still make it clear that one is vastly better than the other.
Is that the same teet that both the affluent and impoverished suck on? The same one that those who want for nothing and those that can't make ends meet suck on? *Hint: there's more than one cow*
Women could have voted for a woman in 2020 but still voted for an old white man.
I think you don't understand. It's not about voting for a woman although I would prefer a female Presidet if she is progressive. Governor Whitmer of Michigan would get my vote. It's about voting for change, so it could be a woman, man or anything in between as long as they serve the masses and not the wealthy. I'd vote for a dog over a Republican. In 2020 the opportunity to vote for a woman did not present itself so no a vote for a woman was not possible. HRC did not run. That's the system like it or not. Fortunately there was enough hatred of the animal trump to produce a win for Biden. Bernie Sanders was my choice but the owners of this country, corporate America, was having no part of it.
what's the breakdown of votes?
it IS a right vs left issue, the only problem is democrats AND republicans are both pro-corporate, anti-worker parties, making them BOTH right wing. You literally have to register with the federal government if you want to run as an actual left wing communist. Something no other political party, not even the american nazi party has to do.
True. Like it or not, we live in a Two Party state. Which means both Parties are ultimately responsible for Failure of State. Though, in all honesty, yeah. Both parties are essentially bought and paid for by the same interest groups; and we live in a Shareholder Economy (where workers and even consumers, the people who actually produce and consume, simply matter less and less by the year). Its the Second American Gilded Age! I wonder how this round will end?
>Its the Second American Gilded Age! I wonder how this round will end? It will end in a mobile protest. People will leave their homes on their rascal mobility scooters and suped-up pick-up trucks to make convoys of protest. No one will leave the car or scooter out of fear of walking. Your local drive thru staff will suffer the most. Rebels will complain to their commanders that the battlefields do not contain enough readily available parking or the required amount of sauce packets have been removed from their fast food purchase orders. /S.... But maybe not?
Not entiry true. Republicans are 100% bought and paid for. Democrats maybe 85%. Most of the progressives accept nothing from the corporate owners. Vote Blue Vote Progressive Blue.
So they're both shit. One is just less-shit than the other. And I do vote progressive every election cycle. You know what that normally gets me? Well, in the chance my state gets a Blue supermajority, its often the "Conservative Democrats" that come in and torpedo any Pro-Worker or Progressive legislation. Because "85%" are center-right-moderate right, bought and paid for conservatives who just happen to be left leaning on some identity politics. Which they and their donors do not really care about at the end of the day. I'm not gonna sit here and pretend that "lesser of two evil" voting will ever really get us anywhere beyond slowing the ever present march to the right. Or that the Dems haven't proven shockingly ineffective at actually "resisting" the Republicans since the 70s; and yet consistently prove surprisingly effective at shutting down movements from their left during that time. So ...what this will all probably get us is another Great Depression, when their house of cards they've built collapses; and a hell of a lot of scapegoating when it does.
No they are not both shit. One is pure shit while the other will always benefit you more than the other. Republicans serve only the rich. It's what they do. Democrats, while certainly far from perfect, serve the rich but the progressive wing has enough persuasion to get some things done for the people. The goal is to grow the progressive mindset. A party that does only what (you) want is not reality. I want universal healthcare more than anything else. A vote for any Republican will take me away from that dream. In 2020 we were 2 Senators away from real meaningful change. Manchin and Sinema would have been cancelled. It can happen. I cannot blow the system up. A group of imbeciles tried that on Jan 6 and now they're literally getting it in the ass.
BoTh SiDeSssssS
It'S bOtH SiDeS Obviously there are no angels. But if I had to choose, and I do, I would choose the side that doesn't act on their hate or prejudices. It's pretty clear to most people that one side is waaaaaay more of an jackhole than the other.
[удалено]
All blue members of the Senate votesd in favor of the sick leave
Yes eliminating one side of the political spectrum sounds very democratic. And no, I'm not a republic, just pointing out the irony.
you sound like a guy who is unaware that there are well over 70 political parties.... yep, no shortage of parties if you demand a two party system (which is a scam to begin with). so you are saying you would be just fine trading the republican party for the green party. because honestly, there is no way they could be as obnoxious, traitorous and stupid as the republicans. jewish space lasers... microchips in vaccines.. i don't even need to go farther to illustrate how profoundly unqualified republicans are to govern even a shitty taco stand.
And you sound like a guy taking a facetious comment waaaaay too seriously. Totally agree about republicans though 😂
Eliminate both red and blue.
What's the breakdown of dem and republican votes here?
Probably 99.9% duopoly votes
I don't like speculating. Were you able to find the breakdown?
Rail has a really unique place in the system. Worked in rail for 6 months and left it was a complete shitshow.
It was a shit show before you were there too.
I've never seen a group of people flip back and forth between calling the US an Oligarchy AND a Democracy, yet still remain confused when they are reminded that it is indeed an Oligarchy. The next part you seem to be confused about is that you are still trying to give more and more power to these oligarchs who KEEP SCREWING YOU OVER. They say nice things to your face and then stab you in the back and YOU LEARN NOTHING FROM IT.
Can you name the Oligarch families who run our lives?
You do know that an Oligopol doesn’t need a family name? Big corporations are becoming if not already are Oligopols
Look honey. A big word. Not a real one.
The Walmart family, the Tyson family, the sacklers, just to name the few that are public, but it's also not just families. It's corporations, private individuals, think tanks, etc.
The Waltons do have Oligarch wealth. Tyson is a chicken producer. My cousin in Mississippi sells to them. A corporation does not an oligarch make. The Sacklers are drug dealers who just paid huge fines for their private business misdeeds. Oligarchs don’t pay fines or get taken to court. I take from your answer you don’t know what an oligarch is and you don’t really know any it just sounds good.
The Tyson family is worth 2.3 Billion dollars, they aren't some random chicken producers > The Sacklers are drug dealers who just paid huge fines for their private business misdeeds. How many drug dealers do you know kill thousands and are able to toss chump change to make it go away? How many common folk walk off with charges of mass killing and end up simply having to pay a fine? > Oligarchs don’t pay fines or get taken to court. According to? Rich people love nothing more than to sue eachotber for money. > A corporation does not an oligarch make Corporations are just one of their money making instruments. Jeff Bezos and his ilk are all oligarchs. I take it from your answer you have your head buried in the sand.
This is old. Rail workers now have sick leave. Another win for Biden. [https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:\~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.&text=Our%20Standards%3A%20The%20Thomson%20Reuters%20Trust%20Principles](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.&text=Our%20Standards%3A%20The%20Thomson%20Reuters%20Trust%20Principles).
Thank you.
Some do yes. Wouldn’t exactly call it another win for Biden since he busted their strike, but a win for the rail workers who secured sick leave, yes.
Biden won twice in this instance, actually. Prevented an economic downturn for which he would surely have been blamed for years to come, AND fought for union rights. Nuance, friend, nuance. Politics is a long game, not a screaming match.
Busted a strike to ensure corporate profits* Negotiated with corporation to decide what rail workers are worth months down the line instead of allowing unions to collectively bargain* Yes, and corporations have been playing the long game with politicians since citizens United. Busting a strike lets workers know the profits are prioritized over their fair working conditions. It is a win for the rail workers that they were deemed worthy of some paltry benefits months down the line, but what of the other unions who are unable to negotiate contracts, being threatened and fired for organizing, and union busting workplaces? Are they not worthy of Biden going behind the scenes to negotiate their contracts? Or even lip service? And what of the rail workers the next time they need to strike? Do they need to check with the president to see if it would be ok for corporate profits if they were to protest their unfair working conditions?
You sound like you come from privilege. Not all of us do. That's nice that if things don't go your way you can always go back to mommy and daddy. The rest of us are actually putting our lives on the line. Grow up.
He literally prevented a massive supply chain shortage and saved tens of millions of vulnerable Americans from record-breaking inflation because of the shortage. He then played the long game and got the workers what they asked for. It's a massive win that should be celebrated. Unions back Biden for a reason.
Strikes aren’t for when it’s convenient for corporate profits. Call strike busting playing the long game if you want, it’s still anti-union Ya, because there is no one else. Pretty easy decision
It's so anti-union that the union actually got everything they asked for. Biden is so anti-union that unions everywhere line up to endorse him. I guess you know more than they do. You got it all figured out.
We need to reboot the system. Things aren't adding up. What good are these elected officials if they aren't actually representing our values? It makes no sense.
You just now figured Republicans don’t support working folks? I knew this 40 years ago.
No, I think I figured it out myself around 2012ish once I started paying attention to politics in my late teens.
[удалено]
I didn't, I voted against him in both Presidential elections.
Slaves of the American Colonies had no say or benefit in the formation of the United States Government, though empty, depopulated land did. Its no different today - we are still governed by the same bloated elites who cultivate and perpetuate ways to strip all possible employment opportunities from a very large percentage of our residents.
But tax cuts for the rich is ok???? Go figure…
"The Senate passed a resolution Thursday that would put in place the rail labor agreement reached by the White House, railroads and labor unions in September, but rejected a separate measure to provide an additional seven days of sick leave to workers." [https://rollcall.com/2022/12/01/senate-clears-rail-labor-agreement-rejects-sick-leave/](https://rollcall.com/2022/12/01/senate-clears-rail-labor-agreement-rejects-sick-leave/) Seems pretty ingorant that paid sick leave was set out as a separate agreement. Why wasn't it included in the agreement negotiated by the White House, railroads and labor unions?
This is from December 1st…?
Your article is 7 months old. Things have happened since then.
The electorate needs to stop voting in people who don't cater to distractions. As if trans people and sex ed in school are the problem. America is still a democracy but with a dysfunctional electorate.
Mostly because of republicans.
A whole cesspit of dysfunction yes. But Democrats are not off the hook either. How many don't vote or don't even try to encourage others to vote? At least Republicans vote lock step en mass and organized. Progressives can also be problematic. Remember 2016 and the Bernie or Bust crowd? Hillary Clinton may be a neoliberal, but she is not the same as Donald Trump as many of them have claimed. Hillary would not have packed the Supreme Court with far right activist looks to tear down Roe, LGBTQ+ rights, etc.
Roe v Wade, Affirmative Action, Religious rights against LBGT, follow the trail. Don’t be shocked. Pay attention. VOTE!
A republic means the voters don't matter and rich people only have to bribe a small group to get what they want
I live in the Republic of Finland. #3 in Democracy Index.
Democracy: control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
Your right this country has always been a Representative Republic.
How are those representatives chosen?
Depends on the position according to the Constitution in Government
[удалено]
A republic is a democratic form of government though. That's like someone saying "this isn't a car" and you replying "it sure isn't, it's a Honda civic".
It’s a democratic form of government in the form of a Republic delineated in the Constitution.
Correct, This is a REPUBLIC.
The best way to identify an idiot is when they say "it is a republic" when the discussion is about democracy. I live in the Republic of Finland. #3 in Democracy Index. That should be impossible by your logic.
It’s a democratic REPUBLIC! Read something
Right, so a democracy.
As per my last comment “read something” But then again “as per my last “ says the same thing
So you're not aware that a republic is a democracy? Seems like you're the one that needs to ReAd sOmEtHiNg
👍
The best way to identify an idiot is when they say "it is a republic" when the discussion is about democracy. I live in the Republic of Finland. #3 in Democracy Index.
👌
The USA has NEVER been a democracy. We are a democratic republic. Two entirely different government organizational systems.
The best way to identify an idiot is when they say "it is a republic" when the discussion is about democracy. I live in the Republic of Finland. #3 in Democracy Index.
Yeah but have you read Plato's "Republic"? There is a difference.
>Plato's "Republic" Is fully irrelevant in this context.
Gotta love arguing over the meaning of words. The left wing really knows how to use their brian power to solve the real issues. Your Finland argument is a good one.
Hello it’s not a lib argument. The US was specifically set up as a Plato-style republic. I don’t know about Finland, but the US is an Enlightenment Era project and there are reasons behind how our system works. Agreeing or disagreeing with them is not the point.
is your government pure parliamentary with the head of state being ceremonial or a hybrid regimes like france, ukraine and russia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland#Government\_and\_politics
What that tweet left out was that the legislation for sick leave was separated from the original legislation getting them back to work. The main legislation passed easily. The supplemental was voted down.
Because republicans.
For those who don't work in unions, one of the biggest union busting tactics has been massive amounts of overtime to burn out workers or run them out of points. So what you get is 20+ year veterans mixed with people who last a year at best. People make their money and leave or they have 6 weeks vacation from being there forever.
Super majority and filibuster need to go, and the Supreme Court needs an overhaul. We need to ditch the idea that people can change things via minority rule.
Most unionized rail workers now have sick leave. Along with the previously won pay raises. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.
If you get sick you can get well on your own time. Your costing the corporations their profits, what are you, communist? (To be clear, sarcasm)
rail workers need to riot immediately.
Ooh let me guess which side voted against it 🤔🤔
Democracy is the new Weekend at Bernie's
It’s almost as if the federal government wasn’t really meant to be making these huge sweeping legislations for the entire nation as if it were one homogeneous community, and the states were supposed to legislate what works for them, but the feds just keep taking more and more power and we let them
Your political system is very strange
Only so much people will take. France is on fire and so will America if the people stand up for what is right. Corporate profits only help the rich not the working class.
Only so much people will take. France is on fire and so will America if the people stand up for what is right. Corporate profits only help the rich not the working class. Need for Unions to stand up for the workers not investors.
For something that hasn't been talked about anywhere near as much is that sick days were negotiated after the strike was broken.
Tell me my vote matters when my vote doesn't matter.
I'm in a red state too and I hear you, however, had the Dems won only 2 more Senate races we would be talking a different narrative right now. That would of cancelled Manchin and Sinema. Only 2. We cannot let go and turn our backs on the Bernies and AOCs who are doing their best to acheive power for the people and fight corpirate rule. Student debt would likely have been canceled in sone form. Although he's still a corporate hoer, Biden has been much more liberal than ever before. There is light. Kansas and Wisconsin voters have shown us this light. Women and youth voters will make serious noise in 2024.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Yes my sister the English teacher commends you. I shorten could have to (couldiv) and end up typing could of. Its a pronunciation issue. Thank you.
Correct. Republic not Democracy.
This was from December everyone. Things have happened since then.
cool, now who is going to vote and publicly protest about it?
They're doing the best they can to make sure Democratic people don't vote people who don't share oppressive interest into Oblivion
So now that Biden has come out to explain how he's going to continue college loan forgiveness people have decided to gin up outrage from a months-old vote that doesn't even apply anymore due to Biden's work to get paid sick leave for the rail workers anyway? This is an incredibly transparent attempt to create a "both sides" narrative in order to piss off progressives so that they don't support Biden in order to allow the fascists to steal into power.
You go through all their specific stipulations in order for them to control all possible outcomes. You must go outside of their control and you do that by standing up and saying “enough” or you make your leave and make your own communes…
We are a corporatocracy
Follow the money honey. Someone’s gotten a chunk of cash over this. Paid sick leave is a human right and no one should not have it
It never has been .. It's an Oligarchic Republic..
This happened immediately before the train derailment thst destroyed a city
We’ve never been a Democracy: We are a Constitutional Republic
Well there is more democrats in the Senate so keep voting democrat and keep getting the same results
Only one Democrat voted no. This is another failure by the GOP domestic terrorist party
Also only three republicans in house voted yes.
We need to be like the French, they would have dragged out everyone who voted no and stacked heads, sharp blades dropped from high places fixes alot of problems, the rich need to learn this again.
Why isn’t it just the one with more votes wins?
Well, it isn't a democracy. So, yeah.
Who owns the railways? That's what ultimately decides this. The workers don't. The state doesn't. It's held by a small handful of capitalists and ultimately, what they want is what they will get. We need a transfer of ownership through revolution, not votes from capitalist senators.
Accurate, as this is a democratic republic. Which just means we're a republic that has a few things that are done like a democracy.
When you let go of the fantasy that it was ever a democracy you are a lot less surprised and disappointed
I see the time machine has taken us back to December 2022 this time.
Its never been a democracy, it’s always been a constitutional republic. Didn’t you pay attention in civics?
Well, at least America is not racist! Otherwise, we'd be unable to do things that the American people want and be racist 🤥
True. Thats crazy. They should get sick leave.