But a tweet from that account was deemed worthy enough to be sourced in the article?

This is the same account sourced in the above article that tweeted this almost 2 hours after this article went up, but this article is sourcing a tweet from almost a week ago.

It’s almost like Jezebel can’t tell the truth.

While Cherelle’s conversation with both the president and vice president may have only happened “finally”, it may be worth noting that there have also been talks with senior officials such as the Secretary of State while the State Department has been and continues to be in something like daily contact with Griner’s “br…

I don’t suppose it’s occurred to you that the Republican who wrote that story was lying? Since there are no judgeships there right now. Didn’t cross your mind?

sigh.

Spoiler alert: The source of this is bullshit.

“Reportedly,” and the “report” is conveniently behind a paywall. But good job flushing out all the anti-Dem bots and doomtrolls, I guess.

Ok, some clarification may be in order here regarding the context.

First of all, the only thing Biden can promise is a nomination. He can’t promise any votes from the Democratic caucus, and he can’t promise that no Democratic Senator won’t filibuster the nomination (and under existing rules any Democratic Senator can…

Through party loyalty as a part of ones core identity. Repubs are party over people, so their people fall in line to appease the loudest group.

Except....people have been voting for “less than perfect” for decades and still get fucked and we still have a catastrophe. It doesn’t seem to alter the outcome much.

I came here to say this exact same thing. And that super majority was at best technical because it counted Joe Lieberman as a democrat and he was an independent at that time and not a reliable vote. Hell he endorsed McCain in 2008.

The Democrats had a filibuster proof super majority in the Senate for effectively only a few months between September 2009 - February 2010. While Arlen Specter switched parties in April 2009 formally creating a super majority, Ted Kennedy had basically retired as he was fighting a brain tumor and by then was no longer…

cringe. tearing down dems to elect Republicans is all you people ever manage

I agree. This sounds like a terrible idea. The land belongs to them because the US Government stole the rest of their land and committed genocide. Suggesting the federal government assert control to mitigate a problem they helped create is insane. And I’m very disappointed that a Jezebel writer would suggest it.…

And how do you “make changes” when Democrats don’t actually have workable majorities in Congress or the Senate?

pray tell, what’s within their power to do?

As much as I like Liz Warren, gotta say this one sounds a little half-baked to me. Aside from the potential issues with the Hyde Amendment, couldn’t states potentially block roads/access to parks, or use laws like Texas has to prosecute drivers who take women to Federal sites, or stop/prosecute/fine drivers or…

Republican voting is actually what got them their “victory.” So it’s logical.

There are House seats in blue states that are held by Republicans. So voting still matters a lot, even in blue states.

Definitely keep whining incessantly about Democrats.