As millions of Americans are about to go hungry due to the US government refusing to fund SNAP, just remember that only two countries voted against making food a basic human right. The US and the terrorist colony of Israel

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.worldEnglish
    94·
    1 day ago

    how many branches of the US government were under Democrat control for how long and at what points but we still got no living wages, universal healthcare, police reform, clean environment, etcetera

    Democrats have held a majority in Congress at various times, with notable periods including the long stretch from 1955 to 1995 in the House and from 1933 to 1953, the control of both chambers after the 2006 elections, and a brief, two-week majority in the Senate in 2001. The party’s largest majority was in the 75th Congress (1937–1938).

    House of Representatives

    1955–1995: Democrats held a majority in the House for 40 years.

    1937–1938: The 75th Congress saw the largest Democratic majority in the House.

    2006: Democrats gained a majority in the House following the midterm elections.

    2018: Democrats won a majority in the House again in the November 2018 midterm elections.

    Senate

    1893–1895: The 53rd Congress had a Democratic majority in both the House and Senate.

    2001: Democrats held a majority for a short period from January 3 to January 20, 2001, due to the deciding vote of Vice President Al Gore.

    2006: Democrats regained control of the Senate after the midterm elections.

    2008: Democrats increased their majority in the Senate, and after the 2008 election, they briefly held a filibuster-proof majority (60–40).

    Other significant periods

    1933–1953: This period is known as the New Deal Democratic Era and saw the party dominate federal government.

    1964: Following the election, Democrats had their largest plurality in history, leading to a Democratic majority in Congress and the 89th Congress.

    2009: Democrats achieved a “trifecta” (control of the House, Senate, and presidency) after the 2008 election.

    https://www.britannica.com/topic/Democratic-Party#%3A~%3Atext=Aided+by+the+growing+opposition%2CTed+Kennedy+following+his+death.

    https://www.senate.gov/senators/majority-minority-leaders.htm#%3A~%3Atext=From+January+3+to+January%2C%2C+effective+June+6%2C+2001.

    https://www.pbs.org/fmc/book/10politics2.htm#%3A~%3Atext=In+thirty-two+of+the%2Cbreak+from+1955+to+1995.

    democrats suck too quit trying to be an uncle tom defending

    both parties suck and should be fucking obvious they are not going to shit for us no matter how many times vote straight ticket democrat or republican

    forty fucking years was that not enough or did republicans fuck that up too somehow or the other voters democrats are always blaming or was the third parties again

    make it make sense

    • Allero@lemmy.today
      1·
      7 hours ago

      Easy. Democrats are sponsored by billionaires. So are Republicans, but they can be openly supportive of billionaires, while Democrats have to show they’re here “for the people”. If Democrats would get serious about anti-billionaire social policies, they would lose funding and media coverage overnight.

      Just look at how they desperately try to tank Mamdani, despite the fact he is fully aligned with Democratic party lines and is immensely popular. Dems know that his “for the people” reputation, even if it’s one mayor of one city, will make billionaires upset, and desperately try to reverse course. Also, other, way less popular candidates got more campaign funds, with much higher average donations - guess who got involved.