Here’s the problem, people don’t vote down ticket, and they only vote every 4 years instead of every 2 years.
The president is more of a cheerleader than a person of substantial power. That’s not to say the office of the president isn’t individually powerful, but you need strong margins in the house and the senate to actually get stuff done.
We kind of had that for 2 years when Obama and we got the affordable care act… Even then the margins weren’t that great; I don’t think Obama was the problem so much as they couldn’t find the support to do something bigger in Congress.
Even with those thin margins Democrats come across the aisle regularly to actually get governance done (e.g. fund fixing infrastructure). They’re not even close, we’ve got one party that actually governs, and another that prints money for the rich, attacks people based on their bedroom preferences, and doesn’t give a shit about the environment.
The president is more of a cheerleader than a person of substantial power.
You’re literally using tactics developed by fascists in your argument here. Somehow, the president is little more than a “powerless cheerleader” if we’re talking about Dems but “the end of democracy” if talking about Trump/Republicans. Both can’t be true.
We kind of had that for 2 years when Obama and we got the affordable care act… Even then, the margins weren’t that great; I don’t think Obama was the problem so much as they couldn’t find the support to do something bigger in Congress.
Even with those thin margins Democrats come across the aisle regularly to actually get governance done
The ACA was a plan written by Republicans. Obama and the Dems chose this over any sane single-payer option to allegedly “appease Republicans” and yet none of them voted for it (and then spent years trying to repeal it). This means we could have had single-payer all along instead of further cementing the private healthcare market that continues to bankrupt Americans to this day.
In another attempt to appease Republicans, they allowed them to steal Obamas SCOTUS appointment while also allowing Trump to steal what should have been Biden’s SCOTUS appointment, stacking the Supreme Court with a 6-3 conservative majority which lead to the end of abortion rights in the country and who knows what else in the coming decades.
Neither party is interested in fixing the absolute train wreck that this country has become. Both serve the rich. One party is just better about messaging and branding. There are many good Dem politicians but the party leadership and party as a whole is just as rotten as the other. That’s why we’re here with Trump having a 50% chance of being president for the third time in a row and why we’ll continue to have candidates like him in the future.
You’re literally using tactics developed by fascists in your argument here.
[citation needed]
Somehow, the president is little more than a “powerless cheerleader” if we’re talking about Dems but “the end of democracy” if talking about Trump/Republicans. Both can’t be true.
They’re over simplifying the problem. Trump is a cheerleader for fascism inside of the United States, a vote for Trump is a vote for every Republican in congress to be emboldened to do Trump like things (and even if they don’t agree with them, fear their own removal).
There’s certainly a different aspect for international issues and relations as well. However, ultimately, congress has all the power in this country. If Democrats had solid super majorities in the house and senate, or there was a super majority that was willing to side with Democrats to protect from Trump, there would be very little reason to worry.
In fact, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion because congress would have held Trump accountable and convicted him during the impeachment hearings preventing him from holding office.
Obama and the Dems chose this over any sane single-payer option to allegedly “appease Republicans”
[Citation needed] see the majorities at the time, they could not get single payer past the majority of the Democrats in congress let alone Republicans. There was not a sufficiently progressive majority.
In another attempt to appease Republicans, they allowed them to steal Obamas SCOTUS appointment while also allowing Trump to steal what should have been Biden’s SCOTUS appointment
They “allowed” that to happen? What could they have done?
They didn’t have control of congress.
I’d go on but I don’t have time to say “they didn’t have control of congress” all day. If you want something done in this country, you need congress (either via super majority) or via a slim majority and an aligned president (and even then in the latter case, results may very due to personal votes/perspectives of representatives).
Here’s the problem, people don’t vote down ticket, and they only vote every 4 years instead of every 2 years.
In no small part due to DNC suppression and interference. This is why people say the neoliberals need to be allowed to fail until they have no option but to tlstop suppression tactics (or leave and go to the GOP where they belong)
The base cannot reform the DNC they can only starve the power structure until it’s desperate enough to stop sniping progressives. It worked after Clinton’s failure, we got a ton of progressives in office after that.
Here’s the problem, people don’t vote down ticket, and they only vote every 4 years instead of every 2 years.
The president is more of a cheerleader than a person of substantial power. That’s not to say the office of the president isn’t individually powerful, but you need strong margins in the house and the senate to actually get stuff done.
We kind of had that for 2 years when Obama and we got the affordable care act… Even then the margins weren’t that great; I don’t think Obama was the problem so much as they couldn’t find the support to do something bigger in Congress.
Even with those thin margins Democrats come across the aisle regularly to actually get governance done (e.g. fund fixing infrastructure). They’re not even close, we’ve got one party that actually governs, and another that prints money for the rich, attacks people based on their bedroom preferences, and doesn’t give a shit about the environment.
You’re literally using tactics developed by fascists in your argument here. Somehow, the president is little more than a “powerless cheerleader” if we’re talking about Dems but “the end of democracy” if talking about Trump/Republicans. Both can’t be true.
The ACA was a plan written by Republicans. Obama and the Dems chose this over any sane single-payer option to allegedly “appease Republicans” and yet none of them voted for it (and then spent years trying to repeal it). This means we could have had single-payer all along instead of further cementing the private healthcare market that continues to bankrupt Americans to this day.
In another attempt to appease Republicans, they allowed them to steal Obamas SCOTUS appointment while also allowing Trump to steal what should have been Biden’s SCOTUS appointment, stacking the Supreme Court with a 6-3 conservative majority which lead to the end of abortion rights in the country and who knows what else in the coming decades.
Neither party is interested in fixing the absolute train wreck that this country has become. Both serve the rich. One party is just better about messaging and branding. There are many good Dem politicians but the party leadership and party as a whole is just as rotten as the other. That’s why we’re here with Trump having a 50% chance of being president for the third time in a row and why we’ll continue to have candidates like him in the future.
[citation needed]
They’re over simplifying the problem. Trump is a cheerleader for fascism inside of the United States, a vote for Trump is a vote for every Republican in congress to be emboldened to do Trump like things (and even if they don’t agree with them, fear their own removal).
There’s certainly a different aspect for international issues and relations as well. However, ultimately, congress has all the power in this country. If Democrats had solid super majorities in the house and senate, or there was a super majority that was willing to side with Democrats to protect from Trump, there would be very little reason to worry.
In fact, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion because congress would have held Trump accountable and convicted him during the impeachment hearings preventing him from holding office.
[Citation needed] see the majorities at the time, they could not get single payer past the majority of the Democrats in congress let alone Republicans. There was not a sufficiently progressive majority.
They “allowed” that to happen? What could they have done?
They didn’t have control of congress.
I’d go on but I don’t have time to say “they didn’t have control of congress” all day. If you want something done in this country, you need congress (either via super majority) or via a slim majority and an aligned president (and even then in the latter case, results may very due to personal votes/perspectives of representatives).
In no small part due to DNC suppression and interference. This is why people say the neoliberals need to be allowed to fail until they have no option but to tlstop suppression tactics (or leave and go to the GOP where they belong)
The base cannot reform the DNC they can only starve the power structure until it’s desperate enough to stop sniping progressives. It worked after Clinton’s failure, we got a ton of progressives in office after that.