Lol devolving into insults instead of making any kind of worthwhile point huh? I could call it a judgement or decision if that makes your panties untwist.

well, as you so intuitively apprehend, the issue is that it was not a law, it was never passed, and has absolutely zero to do with Democrats having a majority, and passing whatever they want, as your original premise held. Since you’ve been so kind as to acknowledge that these matters of national legislation can indeed be “called what you want”, let’s refer to it as a Supreme Court decision.

(Note for those outside the United States: The Supreme Court is a separate branch of the US government, and has only retroactive bearing on the activities of the Congress.)

Now that our collective panties are untwisted, what the fuck do you think a Democratic majority has to do with an individual Supreme Court decision? Is that a worthwhile fucking point? I would say so, yes.

Point is, Dems had the house and Senate when it went into effect.

Again - what the fuck do you think that means? It means nothing.

They’ve had many opportunities over the years to do something about it

Oh have they? Congressional historian are you? Big into following the vagaries of the House and Senate? No. No you’re not. You have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about. “Many opportunities”. Give me one. One opportunity when they could do something about it and specifically chose not to. (In other words, whatever they did during that “many opportunity” was much less important than campaign reform.)

But it took a billionaire shadow president for them to even make noise about it. It’s just virtue signaling.

Bullshit. You’re making up bullshit because you don’t know why you’re wrong.

Here’s a brilliant insight for everyone who’s convinced this is a simple situation: it is not. If you’ve never been involved in anything more complicated than a project rollout or a school play you might not appreciate this, but passing a Constitutional amendments is not just complicated but it’s ridiculously difficult to do - because it was set up to be difficult to do. Passing a law only marginally less so.

Should the Democrats have been railing about campaign reform at every speech from the moment the SCOTUS inflicted it on us? Yes. Yes they should. But as it happens there are other things going on in the government, and they may have been limited somewhat by the fact that less than five fucking percent of registered voters can see clear to getting them enough leeway to get it done.

Partially because of this idiot logic that “they could have done it and didn’t want to”.