Bro literally demonstrably didn’t because caucusing independent Joe Lieberman voted against Public Option leaving the DNC dead in the water with 59 and a Republican Filibuster. The DNC count was 58 + 2 ind, and only for 72 days.
Obama White House worked against itself on healthcare reform during that time period. Actively. Lieberman was essentially helping the White House’s mission.
Some of us who were fighting that fight back then haven’t forgotten or willfully pulled the wool over our eyes when the turn happened. Some of us were still pissed about abortion disappearing from legistlative priorities immediately after the election.
This ridiculous trend of people linking one or multiple opinion articles is as fucking annoying as Tankies leaving a giant wall of text pulling from various manifestos, you’ve basically done the same thing with an added middleman. A bunch of what-ifs and hypotheticals doesn’t change the facts. Getting 58 DNC senators wasn’t enough but it was still a huge accomplishment, and this “all or nothing” approach to reform is just childish. Just because Obama didn’t give Dean a bunch of positions doesn’t indicate any acts of malice, and his actual choice for HHS, Kathleen Sebelius was also a supporter for Public Option.
Overturning SCOTUS decisions isn’t as simple as electing a simple senate majority, you’re either wildly misinformed or you’re arguing in bad faith.
Under Obama they had a supermajority of 58 plus 2 Independents for 72 days and it was still the most productive congress over a decade before and after it, and the SCOTUS had until much later on upheld the Roe v Wade decision so it was probably low on the priority list.
I mean, it’s not like anybody expected Obama’s last scotus nomination to be denied by congress and the next presidency to replace enough judges to completely flip the majority around.
Bro literally demonstrably didn’t because caucusing independent Joe Lieberman voted against Public Option leaving the DNC dead in the water with 59 and a Republican Filibuster. The DNC count was 58 + 2 ind, and only for 72 days.
Here’s an article from 2009 that analyzes this point about the White House during the 111th Congress bit: https://www.politico.com/story/2009/12/what-if-obama-hadnt-ostracized-dean-030752
Obama White House worked against itself on healthcare reform during that time period. Actively. Lieberman was essentially helping the White House’s mission.
Some of us who were fighting that fight back then haven’t forgotten or willfully pulled the wool over our eyes when the turn happened. Some of us were still pissed about abortion disappearing from legistlative priorities immediately after the election.
This ridiculous trend of people linking one or multiple opinion articles is as fucking annoying as Tankies leaving a giant wall of text pulling from various manifestos, you’ve basically done the same thing with an added middleman. A bunch of what-ifs and hypotheticals doesn’t change the facts. Getting 58 DNC senators wasn’t enough but it was still a huge accomplishment, and this “all or nothing” approach to reform is just childish. Just because Obama didn’t give Dean a bunch of positions doesn’t indicate any acts of malice, and his actual choice for HHS, Kathleen Sebelius was also a supporter for Public Option.
Overturning SCOTUS decisions isn’t as simple as electing a simple senate majority, you’re either wildly misinformed or you’re arguing in bad faith.
Are you referring to Dobbs? …In response to the Obama White House backing off codifying Roe v Wade in his first term?
Under Obama they had a supermajority of 58 plus 2 Independents for 72 days and it was still the most productive congress over a decade before and after it, and the SCOTUS had until much later on upheld the Roe v Wade decision so it was probably low on the priority list.
I mean, it’s not like anybody expected Obama’s last scotus nomination to be denied by congress and the next presidency to replace enough judges to completely flip the majority around.
“Childish” is framing opinion different than your own as lesser rather than engaging, and accusing others of bad faith.
Do i need to make myself more clear, young man? Or would that be uncivil? Sheesh, you’re as exhausting as a teenager
Oh I didn’t engage? Yes clearly I didn’t engage. Sorry for not engaging.
I’m sorry i have never found the proper combination of words to make empty fools discover shame, so i guess we’re both sad now.