308
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
308 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19090 readers
3729 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
so it is in her estimation, knowingly useless and performative.
and the republicans know it too.
so what exactly is the point?
in my opinion, it is the standard democrat cynicism. it is simply something that in the future can be used as a bullet point for her future candidacy. without context, one could write 'honestly' she "fought" for IVF.
and how many will link her 'fight' uncritically in the future? i bet more than a few.
Back in the before times, bills would come to a vote and bills that had virtually total support would go thru with unanimous consent. Now, bills are blocked from being voted on so that Senators aren't on the record being shitbags. As you quoted Vance saying, "“it’s idiotic for us to take the bait” in regards to Democrats using the bill to force Republicans to publicly declare whether or not they support IVF."
Think about that statement from a Senator, then marvel at how fundamentally different he sees the job of a Senator from say, you or me or regular humans.
Duckworth is putting a face to whoever opposes a wildly popular issue, IVF treatment. It causes people to think about the issue, because legislators are in fact advocators (you know, in complete contrast to Vance trying to hide what he advocates for). There's nothing performative about it.
For Duckworth and for many people, IVF is a opportunity that is basically magic. It changes their lives and it gives them the opportunity to have children. There are few things more powerful than that, and it's tone deaf to an extreme degree to think that something is performative just because it isn't targeted at you.
I mean, usually I'd say you're being a petulant childish asshole, but I'm trying to be better too.
It's ok if everything isn't important to you, champ. It can be important to others and we can support that. There will be Republican supporters of IVF that wanna know too.
Thanks for writing that up, appreciated.
Edit: Wow, a ninja edit just to add insults? I have never had this happen to me before. goodness, how deliciously underhanded of you <3
It wasn't for you. Your posts are banal and amateurish. It was for other people.
Oh dear
What else can the Senate minority do Mr joad? Do you feel it would be better if the Senate minority just crossed their arms and wait it out?
It is standard practice for someone lacking information on a given topic to derisively ask those they disagree with to become masters of said topic, then nit-picking anything that person might come up with.
This is a boring pattern. Let us change it.
This is actually the point i was making. What they are doing amounts to crossing their arms in my estimation.
Performative grandstanding, tough guy tweeting and fundraising. Uselessness is their MO imo.
As for what i want from them? To do what i asked them to, successfully represent me. I don't care how it's done. Does that sound unfair? It shouldn't, it should sound familiar. It sounds like what you and i are expected to do at our jobs every day. Our excuses do not save us from getting axed. We are not allowed to place blame on our co-workers. We get it done, or we're gone.
Just like any other job they're subject to a performance review. In this case my review holds little weight, but i don't need you going to bat for them, i need you to take them to task. I need you to stop accepting their excuses.
Until enough people do, why should their performance increase? What evidence have you picked up during your lifetime that compels you to take them at their word, that they'll do better next quarter "as long as you hire some of their friends to help them do the job" they are currently, and for a long time have utterly failed to do?