Roe is popular & people don't like to see rights being taken away. Democrats should run in Senate and House on promise to codify Roe. What's the argument against it (especially since they can't deliver other promises).
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is about giving Collins and Murkowski cover yes?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Deleting my tweet as you did say it.. Mine was a stupid tweet.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Democratic promises to do something if they win always run up against their record of not doing those things in the past. I’m not saying they shouldn’t try, but it’s going to be mocked, and rightfully so.
-
You know, it is hardly unusual for a party with a paper-thin majority to be unable to get sufficient unanimity to do everything it promised. The GOP held the trifecta in 2017 but couldn't repeal the ACA.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So, you're saying that only a half dozen Republican Senators need to miss the vote, for some reason, is what I'm hearing.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm just confused why we are supposed to believe Murkowski or Collins is going to vote to kill the filibuster? Or are we supposed to believe 12 GOP senators are going to codify Roe?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Override a veto? Wtf…
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Even if they gain enough seats in the Senate, how are they going to keep control of the House, when courts strike down D gerrymanders in NY and uphold R ones in red states?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.