If Republicans are voting against it too they are also to blame though? If some Republicans would vote for it then it could pass. I'm an Australian so maybe there is nuance here I'm missing about how the US of A's legislative process works, but I don't understand why you think they don't deserve some culpability and a mention?
* Doesn't have enough votes in congress, even though 95% of a single caucus that makes up 50% supports it because 10% of votes have to come from another caucus.
If 49% votes consistently binary; and another party has 5% on a gradient depending on policy; and 60% of consensus + executive signing is required then no, you can't ignore the issue of having 2 parties.
Comments
Couldn’t you just say not enough Democrats support it without somewhere interweaving blame on Republicans?
If Republicans are voting against it too they are also to blame though? If some Republicans would vote for it then it could pass. I'm an Australian so maybe there is nuance here I'm missing about how the US of A's legislative process works, but I don't understand why you think they don't deserve some culpability and a mention?
You could, but that would be less precise.
* Doesn't have enough votes in congress, even though 95% of a single caucus that makes up 50% supports it because 10% of votes have to come from another caucus.
If 49% votes consistently binary; and another party has 5% on a gradient depending on policy; and 60% of consensus + executive signing is required then no, you can't ignore the issue of having 2 parties.
The people who would vote against it share the blame for it not happening. Some of those people are Republicans. So, no.
Not just some, most