Progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) announced Wednesday that there are currently enough votes in the Senate to suspend the filibuster to codify Roe v. Wade and abortion rights if Democrats win control of the House and keep the Senate and White House.
“We will suspend the filibuster. We have the votes for that on Roe v. Wade,” Warren said on ABC’s “The View.”
She said if Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2025, “the first vote Democrats will take in the Senate, the first substantive vote, will be to make Roe v. Wade law of the land again in America.”
You clearly don’t have any idea what either of those two words mean.
No. It’s possible and in fact a good thing to speak up when the people who are supposed to represent you aren’t doing their job. Whether or not you have everything they need to do in stead ready for them to reflexively reject.
I was using a simplified analogy to illustrate the folly of your “fix it or shut up about it being broken” approach to government, not making a 1:1 comparison.
As is clear by my dissent, I have NOT meekly resigned myself to the status quo, like you seem to have m
I can make unreasonable demands too: either learn what words mean and get a better catch phrase or shut up.
Nope. That’s still not what apathy means. You might mean contrarianism. You’d still be wrong, but at least your false accusation would be logically consistent with the rest of your reductionist pro-establishment rant.
If you want to argue semantics, that’s fine. My point stands. It is apathy in the sense that you are here exclusively to promote voter apathy by emphasizing that:
From google/wikipedia (emphasis mine):
Political apathy is a lack of interest or apathy towards politics. This includes voter apathy
I carefully picked these words with intention -not to come up with a slogan.
By looking at the trend in your posts, they all echo the same trend: Voting is ineffective. Now, it’s possible you are simply echoing this sentiment by agreeing with other posts/users that have determined for you that political engagement is ineffective, because after all “The powers that be have already decided everything for us”. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are in fact a human person with good intentions. But either way, you’ve picked up the rhetoric of disinformation campaigns and determined you agree with it and here we are.
You are welcome to keep expressing dissent over. and over. and over. without any semblance of a path to redress any of these concerns but I am also welcome to call this out as a nihilistic outlook because the revolution hasn’t come knocking at the door yet.
Nope, I’m doing no such thing. On the contrary, I encourage voters to be rightfully pissed off and hold their elected representatives accountable.
No, I’m saying DON’T LET THEM!
Again with your insistence that you aren’t allowed to voice your dissatisfaction with politicians unless you’re ready to do their jobs for them if not outright replace them 🤦
Which is the opposite of what I’m exhibiting. Pointing out alienation ≠ not caring or telling others not to care.
Then you’re even dumber than I thought.
That was in reference to your repetition of “shit or get off the pot”
That’s not what I’m saying, no. ONLY voting without holding your representatives accountable is ineffective. I consider voting the bare minimum, not the whole solution. Any comprehensive good faith reading would bring you to that conclusion.
Nah, unlike willfully obtuse apparatchiks like yourself, I’m actually capable of independent and logical thought.
You can’t be this fucking obtuse 🤦. I’m saying NOT TO LET THEM, not that it’s inevitable like the strawman you keep trotting out
Yeah, you made the lie of that clear about 4 strawman repetitions ago 🙄
Another typical establishment shill deflection: " everyone who doesn’t agree with me is a bot" 🤦
Yeah. Unlike certain people who don’t know what words mean, I’m arguing in good faith as always. You should try it.
Do you rent yourself out to cinemas? Because that’s an impressive amount of projection!
Could have fooled me!
Again: it’s not my job.
Sure, there’s no law about being willfully obtuse and pretending that not falling in line equals both caring. It’s arrogant and annoying, but not illegal.
An enabler of the corrupt establishment like you probably hopes it never does. You’d NOT fare well in a system where critical thinking is valued higher than blind obedience.
You said incremental progress is not good enough, right?
So, what’s the best way pray tell?
Comprehensive reform like Women’s Suffrage, The New Deal*, The GI Bill*, the Great Society reforms, the civil rights acts of the 60s.
Fundamental systemic change happens suddenly as a result of people protesting so much that the politicians can no longer ignore their will, NOT incrementally over decades as both parties gradually drift further and further to the right.
*without the racial discrimination, of course
Yea, so progress depends exclusively on massive acts of protest now? And none of those changes are being reversed?
Yes, those movements were instrumental in moving things forward but to rely on them exclusively is very disparaging to the mountain of work that happens at the local and grassroots level every day by people who are putting hard work towards that unsexy incremental change that you so despise. It’s so minimizing to the people who depend on those policies.
“The price of liberty is eternal vigilance”
That eternal vigilance is that incremental change you are offended by. You can protest day in and night, but without the work to keep the flame of liberty alight it’s just that…empty protest. The left is so divided right now, even getting them to protest the same things is almost impossible.
I think you are a good person with good intentions -I really do. But protest without the work to keep democracy going is like hitting rocks hoping the fire stays on.