mastodon.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit

Administered by:

Server stats:

380K
active users

You know I didn't expect a phone call at 6:00 AM about voting for & against & to protect " ", while they don't give a damn about people from literally being sent to a fucking Holocaust by & possibly the entire , which sends a message to / and the entire they can do whatever the fuck they want!

So no support for & or even not allowing .

& would rather literally blame voters who care about , &/or of descent citizens, for making shitty poll numbers be so shit in the most easy in .

Yet I'm suppose to give her my vote to instead of & to build the who's literally advocating for an end of the & when she and her is literally killing people & continue this shit?!

@Faithslayer202 Trump wants to ban Palestinians from America….

@Faithslayer202 @howards question:

How do you feel about #transrights ?

them.us/story/butch-ware-green

Also, Stein is going to lose, your vote would siphon votes away from someone who would potentially allow Palestinian refugees into the US. That someone isn't Trump.

Them. · Green Party VP Candidate Butch Ware Is Getting Heat for Anti-Trans CommentsBy James Factora
Nathaniel Gregory

@elan @howards

Then I'll go to Claudia De la Cruz of the Party for and ! Those are the only ones against where as , who's a genocide enabler and allowed it under her party, and , who is a bumbling dumbass who says the quiet part out loud, are no different.

Video by @socialismforall: youtube.com/watch?v=sg-SJwO3XYQ

@Faithslayer202 @elan @socialismforall …first, the Vice President does not make policy. Let’s get that right…

@howards @elan @socialismforall

Yet she could just push Biden to stop it. The very fact that the continue giving 70% of weapons to without any thoughts or suspension on what they're doing with it shows they know what their doing to and don't care as they benefit from a economically.

That's what the west benefits from all of this.

@Faithslayer202 @elan @socialismforall …the US is very clearly telling Netanyahu the limits to what kinds of aid weapons can be used in Gaza….why are you giving Hamas a free pass?

@howards @Faithslayer202 @socialismforall

I question OP's motivations..

This behavior is consistent with the behavior in real life: Protest at Harris / Biden rallies, but not at Trumps.

Why do you think that is?

🇷🇺 ?

@howards @Faithslayer202 @socialismforall yep! Pressure should be applied to ALL parties in the conflict.

It's unclear why folks don't see this.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Any vote for anyone other than Harris is a vote for trump.

🤷

I get you want to vote your conscious, and that is your choice-- however your vote won't affect any change at all.

Not acknowledging this fact makes me question your motives.

@elan @howards @socialismforall

which this is democratic party tactics of manipulation to shame voters while they continue to not fight fascists but instead work with them.

made that clear with this tweet on hoping this election will help reemerge a "normal" which means the 2000 ones who & lead the War.
twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/stat

X (formerly Twitter)Pete Buttigieg (@PeteButtigieg) on XA vote for @KamalaHarris is a vote to get politics out of everyone’s face - and maybe even start to see a normal Republican Party reemerge.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Just to clarify, are you saying that your vote to not trump or harris will save the Palestinian people?

Just want to make sure we're communicating properly here.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall yeah. I'm exiting out of this discussion.

I encourage you to dig a bit deeper into the complexities that exist in not just Israel/Palestinian issues, but also the complexities around governing 400 million people.

To be absolutely clear on my position:

Everyone has a right to life until they infringe on the rights of others.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

> continue to not fight fascists but instead work with them.

what does this even mean? Harris is working with Fascists? news to me...

@elan @howards @socialismforall

The always been working with them like in 2000 prior to the invasion of .

@Faithslayer202 @elan @socialismforall “normal“ meaning a return to being a party that wins or loses elections by the American people and supports and abides by the constitution…

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Neil Gorsuch (2017): Following Justice Antonin Scalia's death in 2016, Senate Republicans, holding the majority, declined to consider President Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland. When President Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch, Democrats, then in the minority, attempted a filibuster. In response, Republicans invoked the nuclear option, altering Senate rules to allow Supreme Court nominations to proceed with a simple majority vote, thereby confirming Gorsuch

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Brett Kavanaugh (2018): With Republicans maintaining a Senate majority, Democrats lacked sufficient votes to block Kavanaugh's confirmation. Despite opposition and controversy, Kavanaugh was confirmed by a 50–48 vote.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Amy Coney Barrett (2020): After Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's passing, Republicans expedited Barrett's nomination and confirmation just weeks before the presidential election. Democrats criticized this move, citing the precedent set in 2016 with Garland. However, lacking a Senate majority, they were unable to prevent Barrett's confirmation.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

while Democrats voiced strong opposition to these nominations, their minority status in the Senate and the procedural changes implemented by Republicans limited their ability to block President Trump's Supreme Court picks.

What could they have done?

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Let's go point by point:

1. Blocking Unanimous Consent
Democratic Strategy: Democrats could have refused unanimous consent for routine matters, forcing time-consuming roll-call votes on issues like the daily agenda, quorum calls, or simple motions. This tactic would have slowed the legislative process and consumed Senate floor time.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Republican Counter-Strategy: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republicans could have used their majority to bypass some of these delays by scheduling additional voting sessions, including extending working hours or weekends. McConnell could also have prioritized the confirmation process over other legislative business, accelerating the SCOTUS vote.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

2. Impeachment Proceedings (e.g., Bill Barr)
Democratic Strategy: Democrats could have introduced impeachment proceedings against then-Attorney General Bill Barr, which would have forced the Senate to address the impeachment trial before other business, per Senate rules, thereby stalling the nomination process.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Republican Counter-Strategy: Republicans could have held an expedited impeachment trial, similar to how they handled Trump’s impeachment later in 2021. With a Senate majority, they could have quickly acquitted Barr, freeing up the calendar to continue with the nomination process. Republicans might also argue that such tactics were transparent attempts to obstruct the Court's functionality, potentially framing them negatively in public opinion.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

3. Government Shutdown
Democratic Strategy: Democrats could have used the threat of a government shutdown by refusing to pass a funding bill unless the nomination process was delayed. This would have pressured Republicans, particularly those vulnerable in the upcoming election, to reconsider moving forward with a controversial nomination.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall Republican Counter-Strategy: Republicans could have leveraged public opinion to frame Democrats as holding the government and essential services hostage over a Supreme Court nomination. Given the timing of some of these nominations close to elections, Republicans might have argued that a shutdown would disrupt critical services and endanger citizens during a pandemic, pushing Democrats to back down.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall
4. Limiting Committee Meetings
Democratic Strategy: Enforcing rules limiting committee meetings to the first two hours of the Senate day could have slowed down the work of the Judiciary Committee, where Supreme Court nominations are reviewed. This would have complicated the logistics of holding hearings and votes within a restricted timeframe.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall Republican Counter-Strategy: McConnell could have altered procedural rules to reduce the impact of these restrictions, possibly by consolidating meeting times or using “pro forma” sessions to extend Senate hours. Given the urgency Republicans expressed over confirming nominees, they might have also pressured Democratic senators to negotiate on committee times to proceed with the nomination.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall
5. Public and Political Pressure
Democratic Strategy: Democrats could have mounted a public relations campaign, emphasizing the importance of letting the next president make the nomination, much as Republicans did when blocking Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland. This would have aimed to sway moderate Republicans or vulnerable incumbents to delay the vote, especially close to an election.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

Republican Counter-Strategy: Republicans could have maintained a unified message that the nomination process was constitutional and necessary. By focusing on their campaign promise to appoint conservative justices, Republicans could appeal to their base and justify the decision to move forward. They might also have pointed to historical precedents where lame-duck or near-election confirmations occurred.

tldr: Gaslight america.

@Faithslayer202 @howards @socialismforall

While Democrats had tools to slow the confirmation process, none guaranteed an outcome that would block the nominations completely. Procedural delays may have bought more time but likely wouldn't have stopped Republicans from proceeding unless Democrats could sway a few Republican senators, which proved difficult given the political alignment and priorities at the time.

@elan @howards @socialismforall

We'll never know since they went forward with the proceedings and just got her in there to fundraise off her to soon overturn .

The haven't done anything when Rights overturn we're leaked, not even with executive order which they could've done.