Assuming he really wants it, and assuming a situation like we have today, where the parties flip flop back and forth between narrow majorities.
He can promise to veto every bill that doesn’t have a veto-proof majority. Then, if you want to pass a bill, you have to work with the other side.
Honestly, I’d like bi-partisanship…I think. Maybe we should only do things at a national level that we agree on in a bi-partisan manner.
I think calls for bi-partisanship from the WH are probably just words. IDK how much room there is for compromise.
It all sort of cracks me up. In 2016/17, Dems were saying Trump “doesn’t have a mandate” because he didn’t win a majority of votes. Repugs were saying ,”FU, elections have consequences.” Now, Repugs are saying, Biden doesn’t have a mandate mostly because of some fantasy about the election being “stolen”, and Dems are saying, FU, elections have consequences.
My senator last week or week before was decrying terrorism…Iran, Hamas. But, when it came to vote for an investigation of Jan 6, nope. Don’t want to know anything. Reminds me of Sgt. Schulz in Hogan’s Heroes, “I zee nothing.”
They certainly trade lies back and forth, and there’s little consistency between what they say in the majority or the minority.
I think the country needs some stability. We seem to fly left and right too easily. Requiring every bill to have a supermajority to pass might be a good temporary solution.
QUOTE: Requiring every bill to have a supermajority to pass might be a good temporary solution.
In theory, that’s an excellent standard. Yet, in practice, it’s likely to lead to continued gridlock, finger-pointing and attempted power grabs.