Let’s say Democrats take all the feasible seats at the mid-terms. Then what? Where will they stand in terms of actually being able to get anything done?
With control of the House, and a narrow Senate majority, they could prevent the Republicans from being able to enact and pass most bad legislation. They probably couldn’t get any good legislation of their own passed (Trump can still veto,) but they would at least be in harm-prevention mode.
Democrats could refuse funding for programs, attach conditions to must-pass spending bills, protect agencies or programs from cuts, force negotiations during shutdown/debt-limit/funding fights. Committees could hold hearings, subpoena documents, subpoena officials, investigate corruption or abuses of power, issue reports, refer findings to DOJ or inspectors general, etc.
They would also make it difficult for Trump to replace a retiring or dying Supreme Court justice (like Thomas or Alito) with a Republican judge. This could be very important during 2027-2028.
Any symbolic actions, like impeaching Trump, will be purely for show and go absolutely nowhere.
Edit: I added some edits now that I realize there is more power than I thought.
Ok, thanks. That’s pretty much what I was thinking. Stop some of the bleeding and hopefully be in a decent position in 2028.
Also start investigating all the malfeasance of the administration and, at the very least, exposing it.
As a political tool, they can pass al kind of legislation benefiting everyone and hit Trump when he vetoes it, even legislation that has some pro-corporate dems against it is safe to pass in the knowledge that Trump will veto it.
Collect all the vetoes and use them as propaganda tools against the Republicans.
As far as impeachment goes, if Democrats take the House I think it needs to happen again, just to be able to start crawling up Trump’s ass with a microscope. If they manage to get the majority in the Senate then they also control the trial in the Senate. Chances are slim to none that Trump would be convicted but they need to be able to shine a light on his corruption. And when he’s acquitted (or the trial goes nowhere under a GOP Senate) then just start the whole process again. It’s not like there’s a shortage of things to impeach him for.
Yeah my thought is a impeachment/veto-proof majority even a possibility? I get it’s unlikely but is it even possible given the number of seats of for election? Even with flipping the “unfeasible” seats?
Definitely not. There is no way the Democrats could get to 67 seats in the Senate in the rosiest scenarios. Even 60 is probably well out of reach.
Hypothetically possible. If the Democrats won every Senate seat which will be contested in November, it looks like that would given that 69 seats. (source)
But, as noted, it’s not really feasible. A number of the GOP-held seats which are up for re-election are in deep red states (Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Wyoming, etc.), where voting trends just don’t support the Democratic candidate having even a slight chance.
I don’t believe Democrats have a chance of flipping enough Senate seats to assure an impeachment conviction. But a simple majority in the Senate is within reach, and I don’t see how Democrats could possibly screw up getting a majority in the House.* In which case, impeach, investigate, and stonewall Trump’s agenda.
* Disclaimer: the number of times in my life that I have told myself “there’s no way Democrats could screw this up”, and then they did, are far too numerous. So while I’m optimistic, I’m not holding my breath.
Got it so not just a couple of completely unfeasible seats to win, it would take flipping basically all the completely unfeasible seats to win 2/3s.
I think in a hypothetical world where the Democrats end up with “only” 60 or 62 seats, which would still be a landslide of historic proportions, it’s at least plausible that as many as 5 Republicans might see the writing in the wall.
They could also repeal bad MAGA bills.
If in the last months, sure, but not for two years- but they could refuse any judge too right wing.
Not this year.
Mind you, with a solid majority and trump going away soon, more of the “moderate” Republicans might cross over.
Trump would veto the repeal.
Yeah totally. That would go wayyy beyond the usual “incumbent does badly in mid terms” narrative. It would actually imperil the trump presidency, not because the remaining senators would grow a conscience but that would show them their personal career is not served by standing by trump
We can dream. A simple Democrat majority undiluted by fascist shitbaggery would be a great win IRL
That is unclear if he can, that would be up to the courts.
A repeal is a law repealing another law, laws can be vetoed by the president, what’s unclear about that?
Correct. A repeal is just another law. The “get rid of the first law law” is called a “repeal”, but it’s just a law. It’s not like it has any special rules or is any easier. And the POTUS can veto laws; that’s one of the oldest and clearest powers given to that role. There is nothing questionable or controversial about it. This is like elementary school Social Studies stuff we get taught in the US.
The balance of power as far as legislation goes is supposed to be… Congress (and only them) can create and pass laws. The president can veto them, and the courts can determine them to be unconstitutional (or otherwise a violation of law) and stop them. Now, that system hasn’t been working so well lately, because all 3 branches for the most part do whatever Trump says, but that’s how it’s supposed to work.
McConnell showed that it’s possible to delay a hearing for several months. So a year or more is certainly doable, and I think the Dems would do exactly that, given the opportunity.
Agreed. McConnell blocked Obama’s nominee for over 10 months. Given that, I would think we could easily do the same if it was say 12-13 months or less. More than that, and I think it could get tricky. It would certainly feel good to restore one that was stolen from us. But if it is longer than 1.5 years or so it starts getting into shredding our democracy territory. I don’t know where I would stand on longer delays.
I live in Mississippi, and it’s not quite in the same category as the others. In the last election for governor, the Democratic candidate came within three points. Cindy Hyde-Smith, the incumbent in this year’s Senate race, got around 54% of the vote in her last two elections, both times against Mike Espy, who was a weaker candidate than this year’s challenger, Scott Colom.
Granted, those last few percentage points are hard to make up; the deep South is notoriously inelastic, with very few swing voters. But my sense is that younger white professionals are trending in the same direction as younger white professionals in other parts of the country, just more slowly, and as soon as that happens, Mississippi starts to look more like Georgia.