• Kichae@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s the point. Opposition bills in the US are often put forth to force members of the majority party to publicly vote against it, so that there is public record of their position on things.

      It’s an easy system to game, too, since it’s trivially easy to include a poisoned pill in the bill that will push the members to reject it.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        20 hours ago

        It’s like how up here in BC we got 3 conservative MPs to vote against opposing tariffs. Sometimes you just float a clear “no-brainer” bill to make the assholes clearly proclaim their assholeitude.

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 hours ago

          It’s important to never let the monsters hide behind their masks. They want passive compliance; never give it to them.

  • TheGoddessAnoia@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Last I looked, any vote in Congress was foreordained unless a few Republicans were suddenly to come down with the measles, and even then, they’d probably drag themselves through DC, infecting everyone they passed, to prove their loyalty to their God Emperor.

    • 60d@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s bread and circus friend. Forcing congressmen to go public with their stance on the issue.

      • TheGoddessAnoia@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        While I would agree with you and Voroxpete under the old rules of US politics, they no longer apply. Seems to me the average Representative either lies through his/her teeth (assuming they have any), or votes performatively, and then does something completely different, or nothing at all. I have come to really, really dislike this kind of performative vote, seeing my fellow Canadians mislead into believing it actually means that there are folks in the House, outside of two or three, who would actually do diddly-squat to prevent their country from overrunning its neighbours to achieve hegemony. Please don’t tell me how your system works, because it stopped working somewhere around Mission Accomplished.

  • Lemmist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Trump: Pfft, I’ll fund the army with healthcare money…

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      and take that money from its rightful owners (the rich)?

      nah, it’s deficit spending all the way down (including for a lot of those tax breaks the rich are getting)

  • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Congress worried about special military operations?

    Does the constitution say that only congress can declare war?

  • puppinstuff@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s a nice gesture but I don’t even think all democrats would vote for this.

    • stardust@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      I think point is to put on record for the history books who the turncoats are that supported this fascist takeover.

    • 60d@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      Then we know who gets helicopter rides when the rides turn. Never forget!