Really you don’t need to read more than one chart:

If you vote for anyone other than Harris, you’re voting for Trump:

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/news/press-releases/committee-democrats-demand-statehood-for-dc-defend-district-s-right-to-home-rule

    An Incumbent party already supports DC statehood and it would benefit their party greatly no less. It is completely possible to transform a party (e.g., how Democrats used to be what Republicans are now) and also push another party out (e.g., the Whigs) from within. We do that one Representative at a time, such as how Bernie Sanders and AOC have transformed the Democrat party.

    I’ve written extensively elsewhere on the topic of abolishing & replacing FPTP and more, and ultimately, I believe it’s going to require a groundswell bipartisan effort state-by-state on a scale as big as the civil rights movement to pressure for a new Constitutional Amendment, along with an accompanying state-level Constitutional amendment in each state. To me it’s the only way to truly fix all the core problems while also making it immune to the corrupt Supreme Court.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      7 days ago

      An Incumbent party already supports DC statehood

      They failed to pass a statehood bill in 2009 and again in 2017. That would suggest the party does not, in fact, support the change.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        In both cases the outcome was overwhelmingly a result of Republican obstructionism with the vast majority who voted to support DC Statehood being Democrat. There is no reason Democrats wouldn’t want another state that would be the bluest in the country to statehood lol. Democrats had a filibuster-proof super-majority for like, two months, and if you recall that kind of had other things going on at the time in 2009—including but not limited to health care reform and recession recovery.

        In 2017… You know who was President and who controlled the Senate, right…?

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          7 days ago

          In both cases the outcome was overwhelmingly a result of Republican obstructionism

          Democrats claiming they need 60 votes to do anything are as big a pack of liars as Republicans claiming Unitary Executive is a thing.

          These are institutions that are hostile to a majority black state.

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            They did and they do. Especially for partisan policies.

            Show me the Republican Senators in 2017 willing to support DC statehood that would get it across the finish line.

            These are institutions that are hostile to a majority black state.

            Major Citation need for an extraordinary claim. Where is your proof Democrats of today whose presidential nominee is black is trying to stop this? Lmao?

            How is DC statehood bad for Dems? Lol.