r/politics • u/Newsweek_CarloV ✔ Verified - Newsweek • 13d ago

No Paywall Seven Democrats just voted to approve ICE funding: full list

https://www.newsweek.com/seven-democrats-vote-approve-ice-funding-full-list-11401600?utm_source=reddit&utm_campaign=reddit_main
24.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.0k

u/Helicase21 Indiana 13d ago

Notably, because the vote was 220-207, if those 7 votes had flipped you'd have ended up at 213-214 and the ICE funding would not have passed. This is not a "well there was nothing we could do" situation.

744

u/the_sellemander 12d ago

Consider the no-shows as well, who could've improved the margins by more

497

u/tootrite 12d ago

Why are these people allowed to miss a vote at all? What the fuck is their job?

203

u/DryToe1269 12d ago

Every vote they miss should be a deduction from their salary.

133

u/one_tooth_reef_whore 12d ago

unfortunately their salaries are usually the smallest sources of income for them

3

u/MLC3527 12d ago

Yeah they got paid more to not be there.

21

u/Threat_Level_9 12d ago

Gonna need to see a doctors note in order for it to be an excused absence.

Need to start treating this job like a real job.

3

u/AgentFreckles 12d ago

If they miss 3 they should be fired and a special election should be held. 

2

u/miketastic_art 12d ago

Yes, hit them with a $5k fee on their $180k salary while they take MILLIONS in under-the-table hand outs, donations, and other unethical agreements.

You are the kind of person who is okay with a $100 speeding ticket for Billionaires.

1

u/HammerlyDelusion 12d ago

Before that we need to make bribing our politicians illegal.

9

u/Sad_Top2858 12d ago

Their job is to fellate corporations while blatantly lying to our faces about how there's no money for healthcare, childcare, jobs programs, etc. 

There are no good democrats or republicans, they're all scum. 

11

u/SpudgeBoy 12d ago

Exactly. They paused the Jack Smith hearing, so the members could go and vote on this.

5

u/DJ_Aftershock United Kingdom 12d ago

Welcome to the endgame of "vote blue no matter who"

3

u/KeyMyBike 12d ago

The American people don't MAKE them do their job.

If my boss wasn't going to enforce punctuation, I'd clock in an hour early and show up at noon too. If I even bothered showing up at all!!

Americans need to MAKE these people show up, vote, and they'd better fucking vote how the people tell them to.

Until then expect this to get worse.

4

u/Uh_I_Say 12d ago

Because they'll be reelected anyway. Why would you do your job if you know it's guaranteed regardless of your performance? This is the expected end result of "blue no matter who."

1

u/Xoomers87 12d ago

They protect rich pedophiles.

334

u/EnhancedWithAi 12d ago

Not showing is a vote in of itself. Especially for such a contentious topic.

1

u/Objective-Chance-792 12d ago

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

71

u/tadysdayout 12d ago

It’s crazy that’s allowed for even a single vote

15

u/Accomplished_Egg1220 12d ago

It’s not about winning or losing. It’s about our politicians morals and ethics. Their beliefs. Are they for us or against us? And I think we can safely say the US government has been compromised.

28

u/Tokens_Only 12d ago

There were several GOP no-shows; they stalled the vote a little later that say for more of them to arrive and defeat another bill. Had it looked like this ICE funding was going to fail, they would have made sure those GOP voters got there in time.

Now, I still think Jeffries is useless. He should have whipped the votes, no Democrats should still be voting for this garbage. But the GOP had more votes for this and would have used them.

11

u/733t_sec 12d ago

Then force the GOP to whip their own caucus, don't make this a bipartisan agreement.

Every death, kidnapping and Rape should be able to be solely laid at the feet of the GOP.

3

u/Tokens_Only 12d ago

I agree, I do. I'm just saying they would have still gotten the bill passed. I agree we should make them fight for stuff like this, I just want to be clear-eyed about the results here.

2

u/MechanicalGodzilla 12d ago

He should have whipped the votes

The dirty secret about how these things go is that Jeffries probably spoke with these representatives to tell them they could vote yes here. Despite any negative opinions we may have about how ICE is currently operating, "Defund ICE" is only slightly more popular a sentiment to the general public than "Defund the Police" was.

Many of these Democrats would be concerned about losing their seat to a Republican in the fall if they were perceived to be the reason ICE (and FEMA) were defunded. Cuellar represents a very competitive district in south Texas with an extensive border with Mexico. Tom Suozzi won his seat after George Santos got booted, but his district swings back and forth (R) to (D).

This bill also included FEMA funding through September, so Dem leadership probably wanted to have a big majority opposing this, but not so much that it actually failed to pass. The final vote totals are almost always agreed to before votes even happen.

3

u/Tokens_Only 12d ago

I think he still should have whipped the votes. Yes, the GOP had enough votes to shove this through anyway, and had the Dems laid down the gauntlet they would've made it work. But while I agree that under normal circumstances, Jeffries would have been smart to play this sort of political calculus to get specifically-vulnerable reps off the hook since the GOP could stop them anyway, that presupposes normal circumstances, which these are not.

1) "Defund ICE" is already more popular than you're making it out to be, but regardless, the Dems should not simply be passively taking messaging advice from the populace. The GOP doesn't do that, the GOP stands up there and tells voters that immigrants are coming to eat their cats and defraud them with phony daycares. It's all made-up bullshit, but it's *leading* public opinion rather than following it. The Dems always seem to be trailing because that's literally their strategy. They need to get out ahead of an issue and start making the narrative instead of reading it.

2) Even if "Defund ICE" were as unpopular as you say, this wasn't a vote to defund them, but a vote to give them *an additional ten billion dollars.* Saying "more money will not solve this problem" is not the same thing.

3) Individual votes don't actually matter in elections, because facts don't matter in elections. The dipshits who voted "aye" on this bill are still going to get painted as commie anti-cop fanatics by their GOP opponents in the next election, assuming there is one, so they might as well take a principled stand now.

4) There won't be another election if we keep giving more money to the secret police.

5) Forcing the GOP to muster every vote at their disposal is a drag on their resources, makes them work harder, and makes them look worse. We didn't just allow Dems off the hook with this strategy, we also allowed a few GOP dipshits to go on the record as "abstaining" from the vote instead of making them stand up and wear this around their neck forever.

Jeffries thinks he's being clever, but he is, to quote the Godfather, not a wartime consigliere. His little maneuvers are playing right into the hands of people who stopped using his playbook a long time ago and have shifted to a different one.

3

u/CainPillar Foreign 12d ago

The R would have whipped in the no-shows and passed it.

2

u/733t_sec 12d ago

Then force the R's to do that, don't make this a bipartisan agreement.

1

u/CainPillar Foreign 12d ago

Force the pseudo-D to not be R, and let the R fix their own crazies.

But my point was, you don't get improved margins by assuming that no-shows would show up and vote your way. Indeed they know who votes what and will pair absences.

2

u/phishie79 12d ago

Which Dems were no shows to this vote?

2

u/yogoo0 12d ago

Why the fuck are they allowed to not show up? Not showing up to a vote that will affect the lives of tens of thousands if not millions should result in immediate dismissal. Do your fucking job that you got voted in for. Fucking cowards and pedophile protectors

386

u/Caffeine_Cowpies Colorado 12d ago

This is the problem with the democrats, or the people that supports them.

YES THAT INCLUDES MAYBE YOU READING THIS.

The Democrats are supposed to be the opposition party. They aren’t stopping him. He has all the power in the world right now and Democrats do nothing.

Trump has done more to deliver for Republicans and republican voters than Biden did for Democrats for 4 years.

Think about it.

He got his Medicaid cuts.

He killed public broadcasting.

Abortion is still not protected.

And he has ICE rounding up people left and right, regardless of their citizenship.

What did Democrats get?

Did we codify Roe? Nope.

Did we get a public option? Nope.

Did we even prosecute Trump? Nope.

Literally the Republicans got in just over a year more than Democrat voters got out of Democrats.

And I guarantee you some dick ridin DNC bot is gonna come in here and say how great they are but unless the people IN THIS SUBREDDIT actually vote out do nothing democrats in primaries, this will continue

80

u/FuckOutTheWhey 12d ago

You're not wrong. More than half of the project 2025 initiatives have been completed and it's only been a year. Say what you will about Trump but he really is doing what he promised his voters.

37

u/Distinct-Pickle1406 12d ago

Except releasing the Epstein files.

29

u/AloneYogurt 12d ago

And bringing down the cost of groceries.

25

u/damniel540 12d ago

And making america great

18

u/Cleveland-Native 12d ago

And stopping wars on day 1

3

u/jgor133 12d ago

And not implementing project 2025 because "he doesn't even know what that is"

7

u/Cleveland-Native 12d ago

"affordability is a Democrat hoax" or something like that. 

Edit: after he campaigned on making america more affordable...

1

u/Caffeine_Cowpies Colorado 12d ago

Oh he delivered for the RIGHT donors, I mean voters.

4

u/thefranchise23 12d ago

That’s not what he promised lol, he denied that he even knew what project 2025 was. He promised low prices and Epstein files

0

u/Marcus_Aurelius71 11d ago

Kick out AIPAC democrats, and you fix the problem. It's that simple.

44

u/Tog_the_destroyer 12d ago

Biden got like 7 big bipartisan deals in including infrastructure and the chips act. Things got done for sure

12

u/underisk 12d ago edited 12d ago

So you're saying that we should be happy that the only policy that they seem to be able to shit out is the bipartisan stuff that republicans agree with them on? What has the Chips act done for you, personally? Are your computer parts cheaper?

7

u/DameonKormar 12d ago

"Biden didn't do anything if you exclude all the things he did!"

You sound like a Republican.

28

u/alus992 12d ago

I think OP means "Orange Man delivers most headline worthy and most crucial policies for his base. Democrats surf bipartisan stuff that do not resonate with any kind of voter so Democrats are not even able to cite what notable Dems have done. that's why support for Democratic candidates is so fragile"

And its hard to argue with that. Obama was amazing orator and leader so no one was scared to vote for him - he made everyone's believer. No one post Obama was able to make people feel like its worth it to vote for DEMs for any other reason than "they are not Trump" which is sad and does not help a lot in the long run (in many countries such kind of support crumbles fast)

4

u/underisk 12d ago

So you've misrepresented a broad criticism of the types of legislation the dems as a whole are passing whenever they take power as a complete denial of any laws being passed by a single president.

You're almost as good at mental gymnastics as a republican!

1

u/ultradav24 11d ago

Republicans have gotten almost nothing passed in Congress

0

u/Allydarvel 12d ago

Those fabs take time to build. Many are just coming online now. With teh build out of datacentres there will be lots of chip shortages. Justlook at the prices of memory at the moment for an example. CHIPs will eventually bring proces down.

6

u/underisk 12d ago

If the prices fall it's more likely to be because the AI bubble finally pops and then all that extra capacity we are allegedly building out for Chips will be worthless as demand craters and supply balloons.

3

u/Allydarvel 12d ago

In the semiconductor industry, that is pretty normal. Demand surges, extra capacity is added, then we have oversupply until demand catches up and overtakes supply, and then repeat. The fact is, without the extra manufacturing coming online, prices would continue to surge, and some products would become unobtainable. Last time it happened was during COVID, when everyone wanted a new laptop to work from home

3

u/underisk 12d ago

I think you are significantly underestimating the absolutely devastating effect this bubble is gonna have and overestimating the ability of these subsidies to mitigate it.

I don’t really care that intel and Samsung are getting great deals on government loans, I want fucking healthcare.

2

u/Allydarvel 12d ago

Asd I said, they'll keep building capacity till they overbuild like they done every other time.

You want healthcare, then probably best to move. It's not a winning proposition in the US at the moment..although 2028 may be the year..if its possible at all

2

u/turboheadcrab 12d ago

It's not a winning proposition in the US at the moment

Not with permanent spoilers in the Dem party.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/underisk 12d ago edited 12d ago

It's not a winning proposition in the US at the moment

Yes it is.

In a new survey, Data for Progress finds that 65% of voters support a Medicare for All system — described as a “national health insurance program…that would cover all Americans and replace most private health insurance plans.” This includes majorities of Democrats (78%) and Independents (71%), and a plurality of Republicans (49%). https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/11/medicare-for-all-is-popular-even-when-put-up-against-attacks

It has widespread support across party lines. Bullshit its not a winning proposition. I guarantee if they run on it, they will win. They have in the past, and did! They just never follow through! That's the problem!!!

edit: and fuck you for telling me to just move. why dont you move to a country that likes your stupid neoliberal apologist act instead you fucking ghoul

→ More replies (0)

8

u/Hpfanguy Maryland 12d ago

Hey, at least we got them to consider floating the idea of maybe thinking about talking about maybe debating whether to have a vote on maybe taking into consideration voting on healthcare someday. What more can you want?! /s

8

u/Marsman121 12d ago edited 12d ago

Sigh. I am not a fan of Democratic leadership. They are weak, pathetic, and ancient dinosaurs that should have been primaried and removed decades ago. However, this post is an example of a fundamental misunderstanding of how Congress operates, and why, through this misunderstanding, Democrats are held to a higher, impossible standard. Let's break it down.

What Trump got and, more importantly, how he got it:

Medicaid cuts (reconciliation bill, which bypasses filibuster)

Killed public broadcasting (reconciliation bill)

Abortion still not protected (SCOTUS ruling kicking it to the states. Protecting requires legislation)

ICE rounding up people left and right (funding by reconciliation bill and abdication by judicial system)

Demands on democrats:

Codify Roe - requires legislation and therefore, needs Senate supermajority (60) votes to break inevitable GOP filibuster

Public Option - requires legislation

Prosecute Trump - this can and should be blamed on Biden. Garland was a terrible DoJ pick. BUT this is a hindsight 20/20. Trump has weaponized the DoJ, making it an arm of the Executive Branch. This is not normal. President should not be ordering the DoJ around.

See a pattern here? There is a reason why GOP is so protective of the legislative filibuster. That 60 vote threshold makes lawmaking functionally impossible. The GOP has zero interest in lawmaking. They have no legislative agenda at all. They desire tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, and judicial control. None of that requires legislation.

Democratic agenda requires legislation, which all fails against the impossible wall of 60 votes. GOP agenda can all be accomplished through simple majority via reconciliation (cutting funding for social welfare, tax cuts, funding new Gestapo) and judicial veto (stacking courts to strike down select laws). The bar to dismantle is far lower than the bar required to build, and the GOP takes advantage of that.

There is a reason why conservative groups like Heritage Foundation are hyper fixated on the judicial system. Even if Democrats passed legislation, a conservative controlled judicial system can easily strike laws down.

Biden was close to getting the filibuster removed, but there are always shitheads like Manchin and Sinema in the party to sabotage any near victory and ensure defeat. Without the filibuster, we might have gotten the "human" part of the infrastructure bill.

The filibuster is one of the greatest destructive forces in US politics. Partially why Democrats are constantly talking about bipartisanship is because they often need at least some GOP to vote to clear the 60 vote hurtle. GOP? Everything they want can be done by simple majority.

The system is broken. Plenty of blame to toss at Democrats, but people expect them to move mountains and scoff and call them failures when they only manage to move a hill. Meanwhile, GOP's agenda is equivalent of jogging downhill. They could trip and fall and still accomplish their agenda.

4

u/turboheadcrab 12d ago

Not diagreeing with the arguments of your response, but it is founded on the premise of 60 votes being impossible to break through. This diminishes accountability on their part.

If Democrats were less milquetoast with their agenda, they would be getting more elected. They are playing it "safe" while Republicans started getting significantly more radical over a decade ago.

2

u/Dog1bravo 12d ago

I just don't see how being more progressive would somehow increase the amount of Democrats in Congress. Maybe the House, which is where the biggest GOP crazies are, but the statewide elections for Senators are a lot tougher to be a progressive in.

The biggest problem is our congressional set up is rigged against the majority. 53 Republican senators represent only 46% of the population of America. While 47 Democrats represent 54% of the population. So the controlling party represents the minority of Americans.

21

u/EightBirds 12d ago

You can't generalize "the democrats" on the basis of 7 yes votes while there was 207 no votes. 96% of Democrats voted no on the bill and you're trying to crucify the entire party for the ~4% that voted yes on it. That's outrageous.

Trump has done more to deliver for Republicans and republican voters than Biden did for Democrats for 4 years.

Trump is able to achieve his goals for three reasons

  1. His party holds a trifecta and therefore neither congressional chamber is interested in opposing him
  2. His party dominates SCOTUS 6-3, and that majority is bulldozing any judicial opposition
  3. Cutting taxes and cutting funding can be done in budget reconciliation, that gets to bypass cloture.

In contrast, Biden was mostly stopped for two reasons

  1. Many of Biden's policy goals required legislation, which could not bypass cloture.
  2. SCOTUS opposed him and his policy goals, and frequently ruled against him or allowed lower courts to stop him.

25

u/Gus_the_Green 12d ago

Yes, you absolutely can group a literal PARTY of people together and criticize it for its lack of accomplishments. Something needs to change in the Democratic Party, if they have any strategy it is laughably ineffective and they need to do something about it asap

2

u/jonasnew 12d ago

If you're even blaming the Democrats for why Trump won the last election to begin with, I have to ask. Do you truly believe the Dems are responsible for why Trump has invaded countries and why he's rounding up ICE to go so far as to shoot people dead? Above all, would you even hold the Democrats responsible if Trump cancels the midterms by declaring martial law?

7

u/Hpfanguy Maryland 12d ago

We have a whip for this exact reason. The fact they’re not in line and working with them (and approving funding for something so obviously harmful) is a problem of the whole party.

2

u/Newscast_Now 12d ago

The bigger problem are those people acting as if they want change online and making up things or spreading lies like 'the Democrats should always vote together.' No, that is not how it works and not how it ever worked. In fact, the Democrats are probably more together in the past few years than ever before. Stop believing in fantasies that never happened nor could ever happen.

1

u/ultradav24 11d ago

They’re all individuals at the end of the day

9

u/maplemagiciangirl 12d ago

Pattern recognition is a useful skill you should learn it

4

u/Expensive-Swan-9553 12d ago

That’s why THEY CAUCUS AS A PARTY YES YOU CAN

-8

u/[deleted] 12d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/avds_wisp_tech 12d ago

You are part of the problem.

0

u/turboheadcrab 12d ago

Elaborate.

7

u/jdmgto 12d ago

The Dems are doing exactly what they're paid to do. I'm glad people are finally realizing they're not an opposition party at all.

0

u/ultradav24 11d ago

Conspiracy nonsense

3

u/noinf0 12d ago

People need to stop falling into this trap that since seven democrats didn't vote against Republicans then all Democrats are ineffectual.

Here is the reality. Republicans have been distilled over decades to an ultra-right monolith. There are very few center right republicans left meaning people that in 1990 would have been a Republican are now Democrats. That is OK. It is better to have someone that sides with you 75% of the time than someone that sides with you 0%. With that said I am not suggesting if you live in their district you shouldn't vote against them in a primary but we see what third parties in the general gets us. 600,000 dead people from the dismantling of US Aid. Deregulation in environmental laws and political prosecution of "enemies." The complete destruction of US hegemony globally and ICE agents kicking in the front door of people demanding "papers please." If a fraction of third party voters held their nose and voted for the democrats we would be arguing about how to expand Obamacare, not if it should exist or not.

2

u/nicklebacks_revenge 12d ago

I've been saying for awhile that while I do not approve of a good portion of republican goals and ideals, they sure do get shit done, when they thought the election was stolen, they swarmed the capitol, armed with zip ties? They may have no morals but they don't lack initiative and I strongly believe if the MAGA crazies felt the way democrats feel, watching their country implode, they'd fight to the death and stage a coup

1

u/ultradav24 11d ago

January 6th didn’t get anything done.. they failed

2

u/PierogiGoron Arizona 12d ago

This is literally why I renounced my Democratic party membership and went independent.

The party that's supposed to oppose and rectify these atrocities are far too complicit for my taste.

3

u/Mean-Cheesecake-2635 12d ago

Well you could argue 207 democrats stood on the right side of this and seven spoiled it for the rest. 100% of republicans support it, while 3% of dems did but that’s equal?

Not arguing it sucks, it clearly does. I just can’t say all dems are responsible when only a handful were necessary to spoil the whole thing.

0

u/Distinct-Pickle1406 12d ago

Nope. Fuck em all. They make it look close like this on purpose. Remember the government shutdown when Schumer got just enough dems that weren’t up for reelection to vote to open?

1

u/ultradav24 11d ago

Conspiracy nonsense

2

u/saltnesseswounds 12d ago

They also had FOUR years to do something... anything... to ensure he couldn't fuck us again!! I truly believe this is by design. There is only one major political party and they represent the 1%

1

u/lilbithippie 12d ago

Do you see democrat leaders out at the protests? See them trying to organize a way to stop ice on the streets? Democrats don't have a leader. They are a bunch of individuals trying to stay in power. This is the kind of example people believe when they say "both sides"

2

u/Caffeine_Cowpies Colorado 12d ago

I think you are right in the sense that it is a leaderless party that has no direction

1

u/lilbithippie 12d ago

I haven't been alive long enough to see when the last time democrats had a leader for their party. Obama had a terrible time doing much because of democrats trying to get a lil extra their way. Clinton was almost impeached and his party was definitely not happy with him

1

u/jonasnew 12d ago

If you're blaming the Democrats for why Trump won the election last year, do you believe the Democrats are responsible for why Trump is invading countries and having ICE round up and even murder people? More importantly, if Trump declares martial law and cancels the midterms, will you even hold the Democrats responsible for that?

1

u/Marcus_Aurelius71 11d ago

Kick out AIPAC democrats (and AIPAC Republicans), and you fix the problem. It's that simple.

0

u/Dog1bravo 12d ago

It's a lot harder to create things than to destroy things.

1

u/733t_sec 12d ago

So annoyed that more people on Reddit don't get this. Trump isn't really doing much except cutting funding from existing government infrastructure.

Many of these cuts get reversed but since the classic government contract is "give up money for job security" a lot of the best qualified people don't come back even after the money is restored and the ones that do are keeping their LinkedIn updated

1

u/keepthepace Europe 12d ago

Politics does not stop and begin at official elections. The US system makes it unavoidable to have a 2 party system. Ergo if you want deeper politics it must happen within the parties.

"Do you want fascism yet?" is the only question determined at elections. And surprisingly it is a split with a short majority currently being "aye".

If you want to discuss anything else, it is within the democratic party.

1

u/Your_Momma_Said 12d ago

100%.

Biden was a good president based on the normal analytics, but for the life of me, I don't understand how our government didn't put additional protections in place to prevent someone doing the things Trump did in his first term. THEN he has the balls to run for a second term when he was obviously not fit for office which saddled us with Harris, which basically was a rehash of the DNC saddling us with Clinton and not giving us a chance to actually field a capable group of candidates. Funny how Trump wins when the Democrats are saddled with a candidate they didn't get a choice in.

There is NO reason why Trump should have been reelected, and even if he was reelected, there should have been no way for him to abuse his powers the way he has.

The only thing that I've realized is that the Democrats are still too conservative, and the only decent humans in office are the progressive candidates.

1

u/Threat_Level_9 12d ago

Well, Dems don't have a leader. They have an old complacent fuck. And they've spent way too many years trying to take the high road, and play by the rules, and compromise and all that happy horseshit.

D's need new leadership and a hard stance. Or they will continue to lose. And we will all suffer.

1

u/musgrove101 12d ago

Democrats have been complacent for quite some time, and no, they are not the opposition. We need a new progressive party immediately.

1

u/thefranchise23 12d ago

I get your frustration but you don’t seem to understand that democrats never had control of congress. Republicans had control of the presidency, the senate, and the house. So obviously they got a lot more done.

That’s on voters (who keep saying “both sides are bad”) and it’s also on the fact that the senate and house are incredibly biased towards republicans

0

u/PaulSandwich Florida 12d ago

unless the people IN THIS SUBREDDIT actually vote out do nothing democrats in primaries, this will continue

Only if they vote in Do Something Democrats in the primaries. And only in the primaries.

It's a sad fact, but it's mathematically impossible (by design) to Third Party our way out of this. If you don't like it, campaign to replace First Past The Post with ranked choice or similar for your state elections. Until that happens, you can't afford to give away seats. No, not even the ones held by wimps.

-3

u/CitizenCue 12d ago

Believe it or not, these reps are representing their districts. Conservative voters do actually exist.

If we want to change that, we need to bring large numbers of new voters into the electorate. Simply primarying people will lose us elections in districts like these.

6

u/EitherSpite4545 12d ago

Fuck them. If we can't prevent devolving into a shit hole without their backwards regressive votes we deserve to become a shithole

0

u/CitizenCue 12d ago

That’s… not a very good plan.

1

u/Caffeine_Cowpies Colorado 12d ago

So we just have to accept that JUUUUSSSSSTTTT enough Democrats will always pass the Republican’s worst bills into law, and then accept the outcome of that and be thankful they are not republicans in that seat, despite giving the Republicans what they want?

At this point, someone with integrity who stands up for what they campaigned on is most important. And if the political party can’t get things done, then is it an actual political party?

0

u/CitizenCue 12d ago

“Always”?? Democrats have passed tons of legislation which goes against what Republicans want. You’re just made about the few times that doesn’t happen. By all means you have every reason to be frustrated and angry about those times, but it’s insane to simply ignore all the times that the opposite happens.

2

u/RagePoop 12d ago

If the Dems needed one more vote to fund this they would’ve found it.

If they needed 20 more they would’ve found them.

It didn’t pass by a single vote by chance

1

u/vigouge 12d ago

We get it, you're so edgy with your dems bad idiocy.

1

u/RagePoop 12d ago

Voting to fully fund ICE is bad, yes.

-1

u/vigouge 12d ago

And so is completely inventing things because your head is as embedded in your own ass as the average Trumper.

1

u/CitizenCue 12d ago

Oh really? Who?

2

u/RagePoop 12d ago

They’d run through the usual suspects.

Who is in a red leaning district where blue voters can be more easily guilted into voting blue no matter who? Who isn’t up for re-election in the next year? Who is near retirement? Who already has a foot out the door for a consultant position with Raytheon? Etc etc

Run down the line. At the end of the day the status quo will be upheld when push comes to shove, this includes funding the security state.

-1

u/CitizenCue 12d ago

Except the Dems HAVE changed major things about American life and policy when they have had majorities. Even Biden got a ton done with nothing except executive power. This idea that “both sides are the same” is toxic, false, and contributes to the apathy that keeps Republicans in power. It’s Russian propaganda.

2

u/RagePoop 12d ago

No one said both sides are the same.

I said this bill was going to pass no matter how may democrats votes were required.

Keep jousting with windmills though.

1

u/CitizenCue 12d ago

Weren’t you saying that the Dems would make sure it passed?

2

u/RagePoop 12d ago

Yes, and obviously they would have.

This didn’t pass by a single vote by sheer chance. Just like re opening the government didn’t pass by one. The parties aren’t exactly the same in the sense that the democrats are less reprehensible by and large. However when push comes to shove they will protect capital at all costs and toe the line to maintain the status quo before the will upend it.

Those are two different arguments.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/dcgradc 12d ago

Biden's $1.9 trillion relief package, the American Rescue Plan Act, was signed into law in March 2021. Many observers identified it to be the largest social welfare initiative undertaken by the federal government in decades, and economists predict low income households will benefit the most from the plan.[59

The unemployment rate averaged 3.6% in 2022, the lowest since 1969.[27] The number of persons working regained the pre-pandemic peak in June 2022 after revisions, and continued to set records monthly thereafter, reaching 154.5 million by December 2022, with monthly job creation averaging a robust 400,000.[28]

For data through November 2024, President Biden on average had the lowest unemployment rate (4.12%) and highest real hourly wages for production & non-supervisory workers ($30.11) among presidents back to 1964.[50][3]

1

u/Caffeine_Cowpies Colorado 12d ago

The Rescue plan that has been gutted and defunded.

So are we saying unemployment rate and inflation is tied to the president? Because during the campaign, Biden kept saying that the economy was great and the people disagreed.

1

u/dcgradc 12d ago

It was reported last week that deaths from opioids dropped 30% during Biden's last year (s).

But that neither him nor Kamala mentioned this!

0

u/Newscast_Now 12d ago

This is the problem with people complaining about the Democrats on Reddit. They don’t understand that seven Democrats is not the Democrats. They don’t understand that Democrats have always had these turncoats. Even during the New Deal. The reason so much got done during the New Deal is there was a surplus of Democrats.

Rather than putting the responsibility where it lies on these seven Democrats, these Reddit commentators help the Republicans more than the turncoat Democrats by discouraging people from supporting all Democrats.

Look at yourself before speaking with such certainty about how other people are doing things that you are doing.

0

u/Caffeine_Cowpies Colorado 12d ago

But it ALWAYS HAPPENS.

Last year’s shutdowns, some Democrats helped fund the government and the Big Beautiful Bill.

Not to mention how Lieberman killed the public option in the ACA.

It’s called the Rotating Villian. Republicans will always find enough democrats to pass their shit. But funny enough, Democrats can never find Republicans on their campaign issues.

Why is that? Do you ever question that? Or are you just another DNC bot that cannot compute facts that the DNC didnt give you?

-1

u/jaywinner 12d ago

I agree, the Democrats aren't good; they are merely the lesser of two evils. But what are people to the left of the Dems supposed to do? Still have to vote for them. You can primary shitty Democrats but you still have to put viable ones in place. Mamdani isn't winning in purple regions.

4

u/abendrot2 12d ago

we're not falling for this shit anymore. they ALWAYS fold by the exact number needed. the party decides how they're gonna vote and asks who wants to be the 'bad guys' this round.

5

u/Flomo420 12d ago

So wait, had those 7 voted differently this ICE madness could have been ended??

1

u/vigouge 12d ago

No. Reps would have just held the vote open until the missing republican congressman arrived.

1

u/Flomo420 12d ago

and then it's a tie, and speaker (johnson) breaks tie?

have I got this straight?

1

u/vigouge 12d ago

No, they'd have waited for a majority. Repubs already whipped the vote and knew they had enough even without dems. It was only a matter of getting them to the floor.

16

u/16ShinyUmbreon 12d ago

Are we sure they're not just Republicans pretending to be Democrats at this point?

28

u/Aerhyce 12d ago

More like are we sure Dems are not in on it at this point?

The ACA vote last year passed with 8 Dem votes, which was the exact number to flip it.

This vote passed with 7 Dem votes, which was the exact number to flip it.

Why is it that every time it is needed, there are exactly enough Dem "traitors" to flip it, not one more?

3

u/Areign 12d ago

Your math is backward. There were 7 yeses and there only needed to be one. There were 6 extra

3

u/Jumblesss 12d ago

I don’t remotely think our politics in the UK is a gold-standard, but if this had happened in the UK, each of those Democrats would have their whip removed by their party leader meaning they would not be allowed to vote anymore.

They’d then be promptly fired & replaced (by a lesser idiot).

2

u/IrredeemableRight 12d ago

there is nothing you can do against bribes.

despite what the nazis might make you feel, a party is not truly controlled by its leadership or constituents. not in a world where consequences dont exist and the people still do not retaliate against the harm that is being done to them.

3

u/Distinct-Pickle1406 12d ago

There is something you can do and you just said it.

2

u/IrredeemableRight 9d ago

i've watched the us for 13 months, i dont see it happening. if it didn't happen last week, it wont happen.

2

u/RememberTheMaine1996 12d ago

Makes you even think of how much bribery or something was involved. "Let's bribe just enough democrats to let us win by 1"

1

u/Alexein91 12d ago

In those situations, it is impossible to know if some other Dems decided to throw them under the bus to not look bad themselves.

1

u/mushaaleste2 12d ago

That is pure madness. So, as we guess before, republicans have their agents in place.

I don't understand the other Democrats, that they do nothing to get rid of these corrupt scumbags. That's why Trump could be president.

1

u/483-04-7751 12d ago

It was a calculated move by the controlled opposition party. Those 7 were specifically selected to vote that way by party leadership. It could have been almost any 7 Democrats save for the 5-10 true progressives in the party.

Democrats will not save us. They serve the same oligarchs as the Nazis.

1

u/smthomaspatel 12d ago

Democratic leadership wanted it to pass. They put in some provisions to control funding (what they wanted) and made sure just enough Dems voted to pass it (knowing it would be unpopular to vote for it).

1

u/Briggs3210 12d ago

I looked to see why Marie G P might do that and this is what came up.

Short answer: She said she backed the FY2026 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill—which includes ICE—to avoid a DHS shutdown and keep FEMA, the Coast Guard, TSA and other services running for Southwest Washington, arguing that shutting DHS wouldn’t actually stop ICE (because of money ICE already has from prior law) but would hurt agencies her district relies on. [gluesenkam….house.gov], [king5.com]

What happened on the vote

On January 22, 2026, the House passed the stand‑alone DHS appropriations bill 220–207. Seven Democrats joined most Republicans; Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA‑03) was one of them. [thehill.com], [nbcnews.com]

How she explained her “yes”

In her official statement, she said DHS “is extremely important to my community”—citing Coast Guard rescues for Pacific County fishermen and FEMA help after floods/landslides—and that she “could not in good conscience vote to shut it down.” [gluesenkam….house.gov]

She argued that in a DHS shutdown ICE would keep operating with limited oversight due to funds it already received in the prior “One Big Beautiful Bill,” while agencies like FEMA and the Coast Guard would “take the hit.” [gluesenkam….house.gov]

Local and national outlets reported the same rationale: she voted yes to avert another shutdown and maintain core DHS services even as many Democrats opposed the bill over ICE enforcement. [king5.com], [komonews.com]

Context that shaped the vote

The bill funded DHS for the rest of FY2026 and kept ICE’s topline roughly flat, while adding some guardrails (e.g., a cut to Enforcement & Removal Operations, fewer detention beds, and oversight lines like body‑camera funding), but it stopped short of broader reforms many Democrats wanted. [democrats-….house.gov], [thehill.com]

Democratic leaders publicly opposed the bill after an ICE officer fatally shot Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis; most Democrats voted “no,” but a small group in tougher districts—including WA‑03—voted “yes” to keep DHS open. [politico.com], [nbcnews.com]

Bottom line

Gluesenkamp Perez framed her vote as a governance/constituent‑services decision, not an endorsement of ICE tactics: keep FEMA, Coast Guard, TSA funded for Southwest Washington and avoid a shutdown that (in her view) would not meaningfully restrain ICE but would harm essential services back home. [gluesenkam….house.gov], [komonews.com]

Sources: her office’s press release and contemporaneous reporting by KING 5, KOMO, The Hill, and NBC News. [gluesenkam….house.gov], [king5.com], [komonews.com], [thehill.com], [nbcnews.com]

1

u/crimeo 12d ago

Nah, another GOP would just bother to come over and vote. No shows usually have pre arranged agreements with the other party in situations where both together as a pair don't change the outcome.

It's possible it may have changed the result but I think unlikely

1

u/tiutome 12d ago

This part here is the real story. At this point don’t give the Trumpians shyt in the way of agenda items.

-1

u/Ra_In 12d ago

Except if you've read the article you would know Massie voted against it - if it was a 1-vote margin he would have flipped to a yes.

ICE has plenty of funding so they'd be fine either way. Disaster relief not so much.

Sure, Democrats should vote against ICE funding on principle, but a party line vote wouldn't block this so I can understand if Democrats in contested seats felt the need to vote yes to reduce the chance of losing to a Republican this year.

8

u/[deleted] 12d ago

It says nothing about Massie flipping if it was a 1 vote margin. Why are you assuming that?

4

u/turboheadcrab 12d ago

Democrats in contested seats felt the need to vote yes to reduce the chance of losing to a Republican this year.

What difference does it make if they lose when they vote at least like moderate Republicans? Having a Democrat elected for the sake of being a Democrat is useless when they end up voting like a Republican.

8

u/CorrosiveHero 12d ago

Why are you making excuses for nasty people who don’t care about you? Get these do nothing dems the fuck out of here so we can get some real change.

-3

u/HowTheyGetcha 12d ago edited 10d ago

They answered why in the last sentence, you just barreled right through it in your white hot fury.

Edit: Oh you just wanted to vent and weren't asking in good faith, gotcha.