• bruhSoulz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    116 hours ago

    Every time I see Bernie’s face its on smt good. Bless him fr

  • the_post_of_tom_joad [any, any]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    106 hours ago

    If 80 senators decide the vote should be anonymous then it could be, right? Normally i don’t think that’d be possible but for something AIPAC hold so dear i could see it

  • Infamousblt [any]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    378 hours ago

    I like this because then we can see who votes against it and know definitively who does and does not support this ongoing genocide

      • Adkml [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        146 hours ago

        That is a perfectly clear message for me actually.

        It’s about opposing genocide or not. “Do nothing knowing that will cause the genocide to continue” is close enough to “continue the genocide” for me.

      • frauddogg [they/them, null/void]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        298 hours ago

        I’d say fence-sitting this vote is even more an indictment than just a “No” vote personally; it doesn’t take a MENSA candidate to tell whether or not funding a genocidal morass of settlers is morally correct

        • Random123
          link
          fedilink
          15 hours ago

          Thats a bit dramatic, its more like silence is complacency in congress

    • Jo Miran
      link
      fedilink
      157 hours ago

      Someone will add something to the bill that will give any who need it an excuse to vote against.

      • Kuori [she/her]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        137 hours ago

        and any who take it can be safely counted as monsters in support of a genocide, fuck what they say after the fact

        • Jo Miran
          link
          fedilink
          35 hours ago

          Expect that “something” added to be a thing that makes the bill a non-starter. Something like ‘no assistance to Ukraine’ or ‘passport required to vote’ or ‘federal abortion pill ban’, etc.

    • davel [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      47 hours ago

      Assuming they don’t do a voice vote (PDF).

      Another example of more subtle forms of exclusion afforded by anonymity can be found in the practice of voice vote in the US Congress. While the roll call voting record, which identifies the voting behavior of each Congress member individually, has established itself as the dominant practice in modern congressional procedures, the default version still practiced today is the voice vote. Here yeas and nays are each expressed verbally and collectively so that the individual vote of the respective Congress member remains unknown to the public. The chair then gauges the majority and decides the vote. This procedure, which is the original practice of the US Congress, undermines transparency and parliamentary accountability. Obscuring voting behavior effectively shuts the public out and metaphorically speaking closes the doors of parliament to public scrutiny. Lynch and Madonna (2103) find that elections incentivize Congress members to request a recorded roll call vote. Thus, while the competition for seats enhances transparency, voice voting is still a common practice when members of Congress want to conceal their voting behavior on controversial issues

  • @style99@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    238 hours ago

    I wonder how many of those who complain about “Jewish space lasers” will suddenly want to vote against this?