• TechyDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      For better or worse, removing a Senator is hard to do. The Senate would need two thirds of Senators to agree with this removal. Even if every Democrat agreed (and I’m even including Sinema and Manchin here), you’d still need 17 Republicans to vote for it.

      Of course, it’s a good thing that it’s hard to do this. Otherwise, the next time Republicans controlled the Senate, they’d start kicking out Democrats one after another for the most idiotic of reasons.

      • greenskye@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly I think it’s worse. I’d be fine with the occasional good senator being removed if it was equally easy to remove the bad. More turnover in general wouldn’t be a bad thing for Congress, especially if it’s in response to something specific. That indicates a somewhat healthy democracy where senators are held accountable to something

        • tory@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ah, you think they still have morals and haven’t sacrificed them all on the altar of bad faith? I’m jealous of your worldview.

          • GreenBottles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I just don’t believe that all of them in their entirety are against the military, most people support the military and it is one of the unifying things about all the parties in the political landscape