• Triasha@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I have bad news about the Senate.

    Reps are probably taking it unless Texas, Florida, or Montana comes through to glad Dems a 50/50 split.

    Now if they can abolish the filibuster at least for adding states and also take the house, they could add DC and Puerto Rico and the next cycle would be friendlier.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      Last poll I saw had Tester up 6 points here in Montana.

      Even if that’s based on a small sample poll you need to be giving people hope that their vote matters. Save the doomerism, pessimism, realism, or whatever else you call what you’re doing until after the election.

      • Triasha@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Senate will be tight in any realistic scenario. Tester in Montana is the most likely of the three I listed to come through and I donated to his campaign.

        I will be voting against Ted Cruz and I am volunteering on weekends to help Collin Allred.

        If anyone reading this is wondering if it’s worth it, I think it absolutely is worth it to donate what you can, and volunteer how you can.

        Voting is the bare minimum. Please do so.

        • dhork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          How does volunteering help?

          These campaigns are raising millions of dollars from all sorts of rich people. Why should you give them your labor for free?

          • Triasha@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Because paid operatives are expensive and knocking on doors is the most effective way to mobilize voters.

      • Triasha@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not likely, but it helps the other side far more than it helps us. It should be removed.

        • Perfide@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Should be doesn’t mean they’ll be able to. You need 60 votes to do so. We’ll be lucky to hold the Senate, let alone pick up 11+ seats.

          • dhork@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            No, that’s the ironic thing. The Filibuster is a Senate rule, and it only takes 50 Senators a simple majority to adopt a new rule.

            Yup, you heard that right. The Filibuster can be erased with a majority vote to set a new rule. The party in power doesn’t do that, though, because they are afraid of what the other side would do if they get the majority.