Off the top of my head, individual lawmakers could have put holds on his cabinet nominees to slow down their consideration and limit the amount of damage they could do, but instead they let people like Marco Rubio sail through and only started exercising that power on lower level appointments after Rubio had already destroyed USAID
I’m pointing out that delaying bad things is it’s own benefit. Your original argument relies on the premise that a delayed outcome is no different than an instantaneous outcome and that is obviously not true. I’m not sure why you need me to connect those dots for you.
Off the top of my head, individual lawmakers could have put holds on his cabinet nominees to slow down their consideration and limit the amount of damage they could do, but instead they let people like Marco Rubio sail through and only started exercising that power on lower level appointments after Rubio had already destroyed USAID
Delaying isn’t stopping anything. You’d be making the same comments just a little later.
If that’s valid logic then stop taking all your meds and let your family get on with the business of mourning your death.
You… you don’t know the difference between electing cabinet members and taking meds?
Your bad faith lacks nuance
I’m pointing out that delaying bad things is it’s own benefit. Your original argument relies on the premise that a delayed outcome is no different than an instantaneous outcome and that is obviously not true. I’m not sure why you need me to connect those dots for you.
The complaint is that there is a power grab that democrats aren’t stopping because they can’t. They don’t have enough votes.
If that power grab happens tomorrow instead of today then the complaint happens tomorrow instead of today.
This is common sense. I’m not sure why it needs to be explained to you.