Remix clone Hacker News

I think the idea is that Trump wields enormous (unprecedented?) control over the members of his party, and thus effectively controls both houses of Congress for at least the next two years. I assume he'll quickly get whatever legislation he wants sent to his desk for signature. I'm wondering how long it takes before the Senate invokes the "nuclear option" on what still requires a filibuster-proof majority to pass.

▲

seanmcdirmid 9 hours ago | parent [-]

He has a one seat majority in the House. That means he needs actual complete buy in from every single Republican house member to pass something if the Democrats completely oppose it.

He had more than that during his last term, so this term should be harder to get things done then last time.

▲

warner25 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Good point - I didn't realize that the new majorities are more narrow than they were in 2017 - but my observation is that he has more control now over these more narrow majorities. In 2017, there were still a lot of "Never Trump" or at least "old establishment" Republicans, and the party had its own brand and ideology that was distinct from Trump. That no longer seems to be the case. And the degree to which he can deploy an angry mob against any Republican that stands up to him, threatening primary challenges or worse, seems totally unprecedented to me.

I say this as a registered Republican since the Bush era who has never voted for Trump. I don't feel like anyone in the party represents me anymore.

▲

seanmcdirmid 8 hours ago | parent [-]

There only needs to be one Republican in the house who doesn't like the bill, and we already know that Trump doesn't do even a little bit of bipartisanship (nor I doubt he will start in this next term).

He only has a couple of years to pass bills also, it is unlikely that the Republicans retain control of the house after the next midterm (unless Trump is popular).

▲

warner25 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm seeing 219 R to 215 D, by the way, and the one remaining vacant seat will probably go R again. Unless I'm interpreting something incorrectly(?), it doesn't look like a one-seat majority. Still more narrow than it was in 2017, as you said, but not quite that narrow.

	▲	seanmcdirmid 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh, ya, now that I look at it it isn't one seat, but 5. I wonder why I thought it was one, maybe that was just for the speaker vote? Anyways, this is better for Trump, since I think 5 seats gives him something to work with. He still needs basic consensus, but one rogue house member doesn't kill everything.