• @PowerCrazy@lemmy.mlEnglish
    4•4 months ago

    No need to change history to protect your best friends, the blue capitalist party. In 2008 they had a super majority for a few months, specifically July and August. Now I should specify, that 60 votes isn’t necessary at all, it’s just another one of those convenient rules that only seems to matter if it’s legislation democrats don’t want to pass in the first place.

    • Scary le Poo
      4•4 months ago

      President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.

      He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken’s election in Minnesota and he didn’t get seated for seven months.

      The President’s cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania’s Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.

      That gave the President 59 votes – still a vote shy of the super majority.

      But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.

      So while the President’s number on paper was 59 Senators – he was really working with just 58 Senators.

      Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 – but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.

      In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy’s seat in September.

      Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.

      Take you and your Mitt Romney talking point and shove it, you soggy bucket bad faith hack.

        • Scary le Poo
          2•4 months ago

          You need to read a lot more closely. You missed some important details.

          One thing that was not mentioned in that was the fact that Joe Lieberman was an independent that leaned very much Republican. So he does not count towards the majority. So that’s even one less.

          • @PowerCrazy@lemmy.mlEnglish
            2•4 months ago

            Oh! How convenient. Democrats, that ran as Democrats, are referred to as Democrats, and are funded by various “Democrat” funding orgs such as the DNC or the DCCC, are suddenly not Democrats when it comes to actions in congress that might matter.

            Maybe we shouldn’t vote for people just because they have a D next to their name?