You're viewing part of a thread.
You understand he leads the Democratic party, which is in Congress, right?
So? That, again, is not how the separation of powers works. The president cannot order an end to the filibuster. That is not something within his power set.
Only the senate can end the filibuster and only through a vote.
He may "lead the Democratic party," but he does not lead the senate and there is no reason that the senate Democrats have to do what he wants. I can only think you are very ignorant about the U.S. government or you would know that Sinema and Manchin would never have agreed to that.
I mean you don't have to take my word for it, take Manchin's- https://www.manchin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/manchin-again-reiterates-his-commitment-to-protecting-filibuster
I get it, you passed the civics course your football coach taught. There are many real powers politicians have that aren't written into bylaws. Trump still has the entire GOP by the balls despite being out for 3+ years, but Biden gets a pass for being unable to whip 2 senators.
Insulting me doesn't explain how Biden could end the filibuster when Manchin was dead set against it. Why do you think he could whip those two senators on ending the filibuster when he couldn't even do it to get his agenda passed without making huge concessions?
Also, why on Earth do you think whipping senators is the president's job when there is literally a person called the majority whip?
I mean if you aren't aware of that, and you don't seem to be, I'm not sure you should be insulting other people about their civics knowledge.
Do you think Trump gave a shit about the opinion of 1 senator or that his whip tells him what they're going to do with strategy? Do you think the whip has equal influence as the President in party leadership? Do you think any successful president has operated without heavy strategic coordination and oversight to Congressional leadership?
All of what you are saying is literally factual, but it's incomplete and naive to how party politics works. Biden is ineffective because he can't direct his own party. Blame Manchin, Sinema, or Houdini if you want, but an effective leader would have succeeded in bringing them in line.
Can you give an example of Trump getting the senate to do what he wanted when a majority of senators was against it please?
So your example of Trump forcing the senate to do something they were against while president is an article about something that happened a year after he was president? I'm not even sure what the relevant part of that article is.
He has more influence as an ex-president than Biden did in year 1
This is what I asked:
Can you give an example of Trump getting the senate to do what he wanted when a majority of senators was against it please?
How is that article an example of such a thing? Can you quote the relevant portion please?
The entire point of whipping is influence and coercion and not literal power enunciated in a charter, bylaw, constitution, or parliamentary procedure you seem to be looking for.
Like McConnell, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a friend and ally of the former president, was clear in his denunciation of Trump immediately following the Jan. 6 attack.
“All I can say is count me out. Enough is enough,” he’d said then.
On Thursday, however, Graham, who remains close to Trump, marked the occasion with a mix of shock and partisan attacks.
The author does on to describe the "GOP’s transformation into the Party of Trump" but Trump didn't do any of this by some manipulation of enumerated power as taught in high school civics about the separation of powers. He did it by appealing to voters and forcing Senators to follow him.
Biden can't appeal to Democrats on things the public already favors because he is a poor leader.