you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 127 points 1 year ago* (111 children)

Working class: "Can we have meaningful reform?"

Conservatives: "No."

Liberals: "No 😘 🌈 "

  • source
  • hideshow 111 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (82 children)

    I feel like this shouldn't have to be explained, but "Both sides bad" does not equal "Both sides equally bad" or "Both sides the same"

    There's not a leftist on Lemmy who wouldn't rather be patronized while being stomped on than being cussed at while being murdered.

    And yes, I voted. No, it didn't help. It was moderates who didn't vote, not leftists. Leftists believe in harm reduction while advocating for harm elimination- the two goals aren't contradictory. Trump stole the election so it's all pretty much moot anyway.

    By focusing on the fact that Democrats version of bad is better than the Republican version of bad, it only helps to ensure that the Democrats are the best we can hope to achieve. There is nothing wrong in wanting actual good and instead of 'least bad'.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 82 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (27 children)

    Calling a genocide a genocide should not be a partisan issue, and if you think we need to temper our discussion of genocide so that your preferred genocider can win a fucking election then you are a genocide denier.

    The way for the dems to differentiate themselves on this issue was to stop doing a genocide. They couldn't do that, and so they enabled the worse option because they were just too horny for killing brown kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (25 children)

    You're angrier at leftists for correctly calling out the dems' genocide than you are at the dems for their genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (15 children)

    If mentioning a genocide helped elect Trump, then doing the genocide helped Trump far more, so I don't know why you're not attacking the dems for that.

    The genocide charge wouldn't carry any weight if it wasn't true.

    Why is this genocide more important to you as a political football than as, you know, a genocide?

    You're a genocide denier. You're not denying it's happening, you're just denying it's worth talking about, which is maybe worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    So are you mad at the dems for making the genocide even worse by doing a genocide which helped them lose an election thus making the genocide worse?

    Why is it leftsts' fault for telling the truth and not dems' fault for making it true?

    Why do we have to be fair to the dems to agree that Trump's genocide would be worse when the dems worked so hard to make "worse" virtually unimaginable?

    Why do we have to be fair to you by always saying Trump is worse but you don't have to be fair to us by acknowledging that there is an actual genocide?

    Just because you have some mental gymnastics to explain why the dems' genocide is somehow something we shouldn't talk about doesn't mean you're not denying it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (11 children)

    But every time we said the dems were doing a genocide we were supposed to say that Trump would somehow be worse, but when you complain about us talking about the dems' complicity in genocide, somehow you don't have to mention that it's a genocide? Because you didn't do that.

    And despite the fact that you acknowledge the dems are complicit in genocide, you have no criticism of that becuase... something about democracy?

    Also if the electorate wants genocide that badly, then why is it bad if we put the genocide at their feet? Aren't we helping them in that case? What are you upset about then?

    If the American people really didn't want genocide they would elect candidates in primaries that were anti genocide (they didn't) or they would vote for the candidate who wanted to just maintain the genocide as it is instead of accelerating it (they didn't).

    You should say, "Yes, that's my favourite genocider! A vote for Joe is a vote for genocide!" waves tiny plastic flag

    Your genocide apologia is breaking your brain.

    You could also learn the most basic facts about the US electoral system and understand that it is not democratic in the slightest, and people do not have a meaningful chance to vote for what they want.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (9 children)

    I think you think the electorate likes genocide, or at least you said so, so I don't understand why you think accusing Joe of genocide would have lost an election.

    If the American people really didn't want genocide they would elect candidates in primaries that were anti genocide (they didn't) or they would vote for the candidate who wanted to just maintain the genocide as it is instead of accelerating it (they didn't).

    people complaining about dems support of genocide while being silent about gop support (including "genocide Joe" chanters, 3rd party voters and non-voters), helped trump win and are responsible for the next 4 years of turbo genocide

    This isn't hard to figure out, but I guess my brain isn't broken by genocide apologia so I maybe I can't understand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    That's weak, doesn't explain anything, and I think I'm done giving oxygen to a genocide denier.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    At least you didn't spend that comment on genocide denial, so let's call it an improvement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    You mean the genocide that Harris said that she was going to support?

    It's always amazing to me that Democrats get mad at people who couldn't stomach voting for genocide, instead of getting mad at the people who ran a pro-genocide campaign.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I will not, as I voted against it, which is more than the Democrats can say

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (51 children)

    How do you know they were leftists? I don't know where you are from, but it's been known that bots and foreign powers have been attempting to influence U.S. elections since at least Trumps first term, and let's be honest it's extremely likely that it has been going on for far longer than that.

    Biden IS pro genocide, So is Harris, So is Trump. I don't think it's bad to point that out. Using it as a reason to vote for a Fascist instead is loony tunes, and as someone who frequents Leftist spaces I can tell you not a single person on reddit or Lemmy proposed any such nonsense who was taken seriously and wasn't' immediately down-voted into oblivion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 51 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (28 children)

    Nah, the majority of Americans chose trump (or staying at home). Of voters, 77 vs 75. I don't vote in German elections (because I'm not German), but the AfD being at 30% or Le Pen being at 33% is way preferable to being at 58% like trumps victory.

    Keep blaming Russians, dems,consultants, billionaires, news and Soros, but trump was elected by the American public, so again, have the day you voted for!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (26 children)

    You really wish I was German, huh? Americans are so fixated with ethnicity and race, just like Germans. But 90 years ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (24 children)

    I might be German in a few years, it's an awesome country. Just a lot paperwork to get the nationality.

    Families ripped apart, protestors beaten and all the other things already happened last time Trump was president. And people vote for him MORE this time around. So have the day you voted for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    i WaS aLmOsT hUmAn 9 yEaRs AgO, nOw I jErK oFf To MuRdErEd ChILdReN wHiLe I ChOkE oN dIeTeR sChWaRz BaLlS.

    hAvE tHe DaY yOu VoTeD fOr!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (20 children)

    I would like less murdered children, but Americans decided otherwise. And now they blame the black lady for their own choice. At least we get a trump hotel in Gaza, yay!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    oH wOnT sOmEbOdY tHiNk Of ThE pOoR aUtHoRiTaRiAn, PrO sLaVeRy, PrO gEnOcIdE pIG?! hEr GeNoCiDe WoUlD hAvE bEeN pReFeRaBlE!

    I'm sure the ghosts of all the murdered Palestinians would thank you for advocating they build vacation homes for rich Zionists in Gaza rather than a hotel. You are such a humanitarian!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (18 children)

    Yes, less genocide is preferable to more genocide. Such a radical idea, huh?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    I don't know how you got it in your head that under a Harris regime there would be 'less genocide', but maybe if you pulled your head out of your ass you might realize how fucking stupid you sound. Genocide is genocide. There's no such thing as a kinder, gentler genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (16 children)

    Every person not ethnically cleansed is a win, but you don't care, world is black and white I guess?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (15 children)

    Every person not ethnically cleansed is a win

    And you have exactly zero evidence that there would be fewer Palestinians ethnically cleansed under a Harris regime, just like everything else in this conversation you pulled that fact straight out of your Popo.

    but you don’t care

    Hilarious for a psychopath who admitted that it hasn't had empathy or compassion in 6 years. A heartless jackass who eats popcorn and laughs while reading about U.S. atrocities.

    world is black and white I guess?

    Oh, you mean exactly like how you refuse to admit to any nuance or extenuating circumstances when it comes to U.S. elections? How Trump getting elected is the fault of every single American except for Kamala Harris and the members of the DNC?

    What an amazing fucking hypocrite you are! lmfao How much do you get paid for every moronic comment you make? Your overtime check will be amazing this week.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (14 children)

    Trump and Bibi announced a textbook ethnic cleansing, Harris had no such plans.

    I have empathy for innocent people in Gaza being murdered and starved. I don't have empathy for moronic americans getting the consequences of their own actions. Easy enough, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (13 children)

    Trump and Bibi announced a textbook ethnic cleansing, Harris had no such plans.

    Source: Your asshole

    I have empathy for innocent people in Gaza being murdered and starved.

    Doubt. You have no empathy for innocent people in the U.S., nothing leads me to believe you are capable of empathy. Besides by your own logic the Palestinians are responsible for Israel being in power, so I'm sure you blame them and think they are getting what they deserve.

    I don’t have empathy for moronic americans getting the consequences of their own actions.

    And you also don't have empathy for the non-moronic Americans whose actions had nothing at all to do with Trump getting elected, and in fact whose actions directly opposed Trump getting elected. Except of course for your beloved DNC, whose actions did in fact lead to Trump being elected. The hypocrisy is palpable.

    Must be nice to feel so superior than millions of people simply by being privileged enough to not be born in the U.S. I'm sure an idiot such as yourself has very little to feel superior about, so enjoy it. You've 'earned' it.

    Easy enough, right?

    Easy for a heartless, brainless, spinless piece of shit I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (12 children)

    Nah, you get what you vote for. Tax breaks for the rich, ICE raids for the poor, and extra genocide? You got it. If the people wanted universal Healthcare and cancelation of student debt they would have voted for it.

    Aka, have the day you voted for!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (10 children)

    I don't think it was an accident, the second time around it was deliberate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Well, do you think it's at all likely or remotely reasonable that someone who was in favor of universal healthcare and free education would prefer a fascist dictator over a center-right Dem? It may not be possible to know for sure, but there certainly are signs.

    Were these people in r/politics or on Facebook by any chance? It's not surprising that the most popular places online to discuss politics would be a prime target for bots and Russians posing as American leftists.

    After Biden finally dropped out, I was advocating we try and get anyone other than Harris- someone who might actually win, on the ballot, but that is not the same as saying I would vote for Trump or not Vote.

    I can 100% relate to people who didn't want to vote for Harris, I didn't want to vote for her, but our election system gives us very little choice in the matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Maybe they didn’t vote for trump, but definitely actively discouraged people from voting blue.

    Again, I'm not sure where you are from but I'm sure its hard to understand what it's like to be an American right now. People criticize the Democrats because most of us who aren't Republicans (which lumps all Liberals in with Leftists) want better than the scraps we have been thrown.

    Every since I was a kid and able to pay attention to politics, the Democrats have been asking us to vote for someone who is problematic, but better than the alternative. "Vote the lesser of two evils" they say, or you will be handing the country over to a monster. And every election the Dems head more and more to the right. But in the Land of the Free we have no fucking other alternatives. We either accept the shit that is forced upon us, or allow a monster to rule. So no, putting Democrats on blast for 'not being perfect' is not the same thing as discouraging people to vote.

    How many times did you ask yourself if the comment you are reading might have come from and been upvoted by a bot or foreign agent? Because Americans do have to be vigilant for that. Also, it's highly likely that republicans reading such a comment would upvote it as well.

    every new gop fuck up asking why democrats didn’t do anything to stop it.

    You don't think that its the Democrats job to try and stop the GOP? You don't think that's what the people who voted for them want them to do? If you look at those comments chances are they are complaining about the Democrats who are actually not doing anything to try and stop it. We aren't asking that about the ones who are trying but failing.

    I cannot support biden (later Harris) because they are not perfect on issue X

    I wish it were as simple as 'not being perfect'. I would kill to have a party I could vote for that was 99% of the way there. Fuck I'd be happy with 70% honestly. I don't blame you for not keeping a super close eye on American politics, but Biden is one of the people directly responsible for our disgusting, ill conceived, immoral, ineffective, and harmful 'War on Drugs'. He's part of the reason violence is as high as it is. He's one of the people directly responsible for the insane incarceration rates. He helped make it legal for the cops to LITERALLY steal from Americans. "Not perfect"? Fuck off with that shit.

    Harris isn't any better, as California's AG she fought the Supreme Court for YEARS to keep human beings locked up in prisons so overcrowded that even the SCOTUS ruled that it was 'Cruel and Unusual Punishment' (that's actually illegal here believe it or not) Why? So she could use those prisoners as literal slave labor (We didn't get rid of Slavery entirely in the U.S., it's still ok if the Government does it). She also fought to make 'Civil Asset Forfeiture' even easier for the cops (the whole "it's legal for the cops to steal from you" thing). She's a 'Tough on Crime' right winger and always has been, despite what Fox news has to say about her. She and Biden were perfect- for each other.

    As you rightly point out what passes for 'the left' in America is considered centrist in Europe, and you want us to what? Thank our lucky stars that the Democrats aren't literal fascists? Are we supposed to just accept worse and worse out of the DNC until one day we are voting for literal fascists because the alternative is a super-ultra-mega fascist?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (17 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 108 points 1 year ago (22 children)

    I’m frustrated with the reflexive "both sides are equally bad" response that shuts down any meaningful analysis of what's actually happening in our politics.

    I'm not naive about the Democratic Party's problems. They struggle with internal divisions, sometimes cave to corporate pressure, and they’ve made compromises that disappointed their base. But when I look at voting records, policy proposals, and legislative priorities, I see meaningful differences that have real consequences for people's lives.

    On issues I care about (healthcare access, climate action, voting rights, ext.) one party consistently proposes solutions and votes for them when they have the numbers. The other party doesn’t just oppose these policies, they fight tooth and nail to undermine them, delay them, or dismantle them entirely. That’s not a matter of opinion. That’s a matter of public record.

    When Democrats fail to deliver, it’s often because they lack sufficient majorities or face procedural roadblocks. When they do have power, they’ve passed significant legislation on infrastructure, climate investment, and healthcare expansion. Meanwhile, when Republicans have unified control, their priorities have been tax cuts for the wealthy and rolling back environmental protections.

    I understand the appeal of cynicism. It can feel sophisticated to dismiss all politicians as equally corrupt. But that cynicism serves the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.

    If you can't tell the difference between someone trying to reform a broken system and someone actively working to keep it broken, you're not offering insight. You're providing cover for obstruction.

    Does this mean Democrats are perfect? Of course not. Should we hold them accountable when they fall short? Absolutely. But pretending there are no meaningful differences between the parties just because neither is perfect makes it harder to build the coalitions we need to create the change we actually want to see.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I agree with you that the parties are not the same. The GOP are outright evil puppets of the billionaire class. The Democrats are ineffectual cowards who've made careers out of paying lip service to the right thing, and every now and then doing something helpful if it's convenient for them and doesn't piss off their billionaire donors. A lot of the time that ends up translating to the same results for most people.

    I don't buy the "sorry, our hands are tied" line we always get from the left. Dems throw up their hands even when they do have majorities. The first meaningful opportunity the Democrats had to obstruct Trump's agenda, after the left base had been screaming for weeks for their representatives to do something, Schumer rolled over immediately. I can't take this party seriously anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I won’t defend Schumer's choice here. It was a bad call, and the anger from House Democrats and the base was completely justified. You're right that the party leadership sometimes folds when they should fight. They make strategic decisions that feel disconnected from the urgency the moment demands. And yes, Democrats have corporate-aligned figures who blunt the force of reform, but that is also a reality of our current system that we have to work within.

    But, sticking to your example, there is a key difference: when Democrats cave, it’s often to avoid causing harm, like a shutdown that would devastate working people. When Republicans cave, it’s to secure more tax cuts, more deregulation, and more authoritarian power. The intent and the outcome are not the same, even if the compromise leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth.

    It also matters that Democrats have factions pushing from within. The anger from House Dems, from AOC, from the base, that’s real pressure that can move things. Republicans don’t have that kind of internal accountability. Their party punishes dissent and rewards obstruction.

    And while it's easy to say “they always have excuses,” the reality is that even when Democrats had a trifecta in 2021, their margin in the Senate was literally 50-50. One or two bad actors (like Manchin or Sinema) could tank an entire agenda, and did. That's not an excuse. That's a math problem, and the only way around it is bigger, more engaged progressive coalitions.

    So yes, Schumer failed in that moment (and many others). Yes, we should be furious. But walking away or writing off the party entirely means handing power back to a movement that’s not just flawed. It’s actively hostile to democracy, human rights, and the planet. That’s not moral purity. That’s surrender.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    Your defense of the Democrats boils down to "at least we're not the GOP." And you're not wrong. I've done my part by voting against the GOP in every election since I was eligible. The Democrats themselves don't even do that. I wish their effort would at least match mine, seeing as it's their full-time job. And I wish you held your reps as accountable as your fellow voters.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago*

    I agree with you and like to emphasis on one point you already mentioned. The demcrats encompass everything to the left of the GOP. Because the GOP is far right, everything to the left of it includes center right, conservatives, centrist and liberal opinions, as well as a lot, or most of the left wing depending on definitions.

    In my opinion this is one of the major reasons why the democrats seem so undecicive, because there already are so many different world views of people that are forced to be in the same party, because effectively, there only are two of them, and the alternative is straight up fascism.

    If the democrats ever regain power, changing the voting system to allow for a 3rd or 4th party to actually emerge would be a saving grace, but unfortunately, the above mentioned composition will likely prevent them from it, even when in power. And on top of that they will have their hands full with the debt crisis.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Democrats CONTINUE to enforce and support the unpopular, treasonous, ineffectual leadership. We can talk about Schumer's bad choice all day long but it means nothing if he is never ever ever ever ever "held accountable" for it. They literally stuck an old fossil with cancer in the DNC chair versus the clearly obvious choice that gets things done and excites the voters. He literally ran a PRO-TRUMP Democrat to unseat McConnell when all the energy was behind Charles Booker.

    Young voters and progressives do not believe in anything you say because there is no will to back it up. They get stabbed in the face over and over and over and over and over again.

    As for the good policies that Dems enacted? They're easily dismantled or else undermined by administrative excess, handing power back to the GOP. Case in point: FEMA and the Lahaina fire relief. FEMA swooped in to help house the displaced; to do this they paid $9000/month in rent to anyone that would help house the victims. All of our rents went up ASTRONOMICALLY because FEMA far exceeded the market rate, leading to more homelessness even for those NOT displaced by the fire. Landlords got RICH AS FUUUUUCK on the taxpayer dime.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I’m frustrated with the reflexive “both sides are equally bad”

    No one is saying both sides are equally bad. And we keep saying this over and over, and it gets ignored. Just so were on the same page NO ONE is saying both sides equally bad.

    ...response that shuts down any meaningful analysis of what’s actually happening in our politics.

    Ironically it's usually the opposite. Someone will make the lightest possible criticism of Liberals and the knee-jerk reaction to that is "So you think both sides are equally bad?!" That's what usually shuts the conversation down.

    sometimes cave to corporate pressure

    Try replacing sometimes with "usually". They may be different corps, but almost all of them are in the pocket of one corp or another.

    they’ve made compromises that disappointed their base

    That's putting it mildly.

    I see meaningful differences that have real consequences for people’s lives.

    Of course, and again literally no one is saying they are equally bad. You can vote for the less bad option while still hoping for meaningful change.

    On issues I care about (healthcare access, climate action, voting rights, ext.) one party consistently proposes solutions and votes for them when they have the numbers.

    It's usually weak, ineffective half-measures more designed to look progressive than actually being progressive, but sure if you compare them to literal Nazi's they are saints.

    When Democrats fail to deliver, it’s often because they lack sufficient majorities or face procedural roadblocks. When they do have power, they’ve passed significant legislation on infrastructure, climate investment, and healthcare expansion.

    So, just as an example when Obama was president and Dems had the majority in both houses of congress, and Republicans were shitting all over themselves proving that they would not compromise a single inch- instead of passing any type of "Medicare for all" or "Right to Healthcare" they passed the highly compromised "Affordable Care Act". Why? Contrast that fact with this statement from Obama prior to the election.

    "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program," Obama said. "I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that's what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That's what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we've got to take back the White House, we've got to take back the Senate, and we've got to take back the House."

    Odd that when the Dems had "taken back" the White House and both houses of Congress the best they could do was a watered down and problematic solution that still left a lot of people without health care. It's not like compromising on that gained them a single Republican vote.

    "Coincidentally" the Healthcare Industry 'donated' over $20 million to the Obama campaign, way more than even the almost $8 million they 'donated' to John McCain. Very odd indeed.

    But that cynicism serves the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.

    I honestly can't think of a single institution anywhere in the world more devoted to maintaining the status quo than the DNC. Not one. They aren't 'progressive' in any way. Obama didn't even come out in support of Gay Marriage until he had been president for over 3 years, and after right wing Democrat Joe Biden already had. This wasn't due to some sense of fairness or equality, it was political pressure.

    If you can’t tell the difference between someone trying to reform a broken system and someone actively working to keep it broken, you’re not offering insight. You’re providing cover for obstruction

    By refusing to even hear about potential failings of 'liberal democrats' without engaging in 'whataboutism', it only strengthens the DNC's position as the 'good guys, fighting for reform' when the reality is they are the 'less bad guys, fighting to maintain the status quo'.

    Fascists are bad. We all know they are bad. We all know they are worse than a bunch of corporate stooges who want everyone to be slaves to Capitalism, but at least you can feel good they are doing the bare minimum to address the multitudes of problems in the country.

    There is a third option, and there is absolutely noting wrong with pointing out the flaws on both sides of the Two Party system and hoping for a future of 'actually good' instead of 'less bad'. Even if it is just a dream, I'd rather waste my life trying to make those dreams real than throwing my arms up and saying "This is the best we can ever hope for".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Ive always put it in the very crude fashion of "They are both going to fuck us, but one of them spits on it and goes in gentle the other one wants us to struggle."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    From my detached non American (but still a citizen of the planet so likely to get fucked hard by the way Americans vote) point of view, seems like Americans are continually letting perfect be the enemy of least bad. "Well since Democrats are kinda bad in these instances maybe we should just go fully fascist theological doom cult. That will force the Democrats to improve, or kill us all."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    American here....I think it's actually more the opposite. Everyone is being told to vote for the lessor evil and no one is getting what they want. That's what caused all this to begin with imo... The Magas torched their party trying to get something different to happen politically (not to excuse them or anyone). This is all on the 2 party system, if we make it out of this I think ending that system is one major change that will need to take place to avoid repeating the cycle. Basically, we lost our Republic a long time ago when Congress stopped representing us and became owned by billionaires.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I have written and rewritten my response here trying to find the right tone. I feel like we are closer to agreement here than might be immediately obvious. I think a lot of what we are seeing now is a result of 50+ years of people who find the idea of your republic distasteful seeking every method they can to erode it away. All the details are just components of this project, seems to me that MAGA is a result of years of stoking xenophobia and anti-intellectualism. Turns out if you spend decades laying the groundwork you can make the situation seem completely hopeless to a whole populace. I sincerely worry the long term goal is to perfect the formula for dismantling democracy and then start exporting it to the rest of the world.

    Or I could be a fool, I don't know and I don't want to rewrite this again. Sorry that this was so rambling.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    It's called controlled opposition. The Democratic party has a lot of passionate, honest people, who want to make the world a better place. But they're funded and directed at the highest levels of leadership by a group that secretly wants to make the world a worse place.

    And the way they accomplish that is making sure the passionate honest people lose. Kamala Harris was bragging about drilling for oil and staying quiet about Gaza because either she or the people giving her advice wanted her to lose.

    "Both sides bad" is the party's intended messaging strategy. And it's a lie. But it's a lie people are falling for and repeating.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Attacking the commenter personally is not helpful. Obviously the whole destruction-of-American-Democracy thing is very different. But let's look at some salient issues.

    As far as the war in Gaza, Biden/ establishment Democrats still stood behind Netanyahu in the wake of Oct 7th. There was only slight functional differences in Biden's America's stance on Israel in Gaza and Trump's.

    Less salient, adding a cap on mortgage interest deductions on taxes. Republicans under Trump I did it to punish wealthy coastal (high home value) residents who rented to vote blue. Democrats left it in place because they approved of people who have more home value paying more taxes.

    It goes on. Both Democrats and Republicans failed to close Guantanamo, advance voting reform, advance marijuana legalization, end the war in Afghanistan, or take ANY action about climate change for decades, etc.

    It's not every issue mind you, but Democrats are frustratingly adherent to the status quo while the United States has needed meaningful reform for decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)