|
Twincityhacker posted:...I'd argue that "not letting the goverment default" is a progressive position. PoundSand puts it a lot more eloquently than I will. Continuing to sacrifice the impoverished and destitute is not a progressive position
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Depending on the details that come out (And whether it actually passes), I think this might actually be a win for Biden? The Dems also let the child tax credits expire. Are they even trying to get rid of the debt limit? As recently as October 2022, Biden didn't want to get rid of it. And while the Dems were in power, they didn't get rid of it. I doubt that when Dems take the House again that they will remove the debt limit. Also, although he's not an active politician anymore, Obama still has great standing and influence with the party and he has described himself as a 80s and 90s Republican
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 06:34
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:And it's amazing how quickly the need to have great victories means presenting failure as success and calling anyone who points it out a whiny unrealistic extremist. It's certainly frustrating. Food prices are insanely high at the moment, but the Dems are choosing to withdraw a helping hand for those who desperately need it. Every time they need to Get Things Done, it's always the poor that suffers first, and the most, and oftentimes the only ones who suffer.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:The deal expands work requirements for public aid because voters in 2022 elected a Republican house, the house is in charge of the budget, and Republicans want work requirements (ok not really, they want to eliminate those programs). If Democrats had wanted the work requirements, they could have done them in the last two years when they controlled both chambers of congress and the presidency. They already made a budget, though, right? This is over raising the debt ceiling so that the country can pay for the spending it already committed to. If the Democrats didn't want the GOP to use the debt ceiling to threaten the country, as they've done many times in the last decade, they could have gotten rid of it in the last two years when they controlled both chambers of congress and the presidency.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 07:42
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:Well, if Biden invented a mind control ray to use to make Kyrsten Sinema vote for it, he could certainly have done that. Biden didn't want the debt ceiling removed. It didn't come down to Sinema or Manchin. It didn't even come up for a vote in the House. It just wallowed in a committee in the House. The Democrats had the opportunity, they had the power, and did nothing even though everyone could see it being used against them... because this isn't the first time this has happened. Or the second. Or third https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/10/21/remarks-by-president-biden-on-historic-deficit-reduction/ quote:THE PRESIDENT: The permanent repeal of the debt ceiling? What do you mean? theCalamity fucked around with this message at 08:12 on May 28, 2023 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 08:06
|
|
|
Biden literally said that removing the debt ceiling would be irresponsible back in October. He wants to keep it even though the GOP has been using it to threaten the country in the past decade. A bill was introduced in the House back in 2021 and it languished in a committee. The Dems had the power to now have this crisis but they let it happen.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 15:43
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I think the "in October" has a lot to do with this. It was two weeks before an election and I think you know what most Americans, who don't follow politics or policy closely, think when they hear the words "no debt limit." You can't say, two weeks before an election, "there should be no debt limit." It's really stupid, but you just can't. Is that why he said removing the debt limit would be irresponsible? Intentionally kneecapping his agenda is responsible? I don't believe that the Democrats have some secret progressive goals and are only hampered by optics and politicking. At some point, you just realize that this is what they want. They are fine with sacrificing the poor. And it happens so often with the Democrats.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:
People focus on the baseline number because it’s a good solid number to show and demonstrate how much it’s gone up compared to how much benefits are cut. It’s easier to grasp than the percentage of GDP is.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 19:06
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jstein_wapo/status/1662952577548386304?s=46&t=o307xxBiew2hWqLPw2eCl Extra work requirements is what Biden wanted lmao
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2023 16:51
|
|
|
Perhaps when asked about overpopulation, Kerry doesn’t have to answer the question directly and instead shift the focus to emissions and waste and whatnot instead of cutting with Malthusian concepts in regards to a continent that has been exploited by western nations for centuries
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:One reasonably common complaint in this thread is about politicians dodging questions as asked and giving an answer that's only partially related, or not at all. It's kind of hard to fault Kerry for answering a question as asked. He could’ve challenged the notion and premise of the question, no? And again, present it as a learning moment. He could have. But he didn’t.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2023 19:46
|
|
|
Blind Pineapple posted:“Party of law and order” means and has always meant supporting the excessive use of force on minorities. It has nothing to do with any consistent vision of law or order, especially one that might result in negative consequences for someone on their side. I agree, but I will say that they do have a consistent vision of law and order. They believe that there are those who the law protects, but does not bind; and those who the law binds, but doesn't protect. See the GOP through that lens and everything they do is pretty consistent.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2023 06:55
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:It's a regular companion piece to "Democrats keep moving right to meet Republicans" that was arguably true once when a lot of online people on the left first were thinking about politics, but just never stopped being said even when it wasn't. Like a miniature version of the right wing arguments that US private health care might be really expensive but it's better quality and shorter waits then Canada or Europe. Obama compared himself to 80s/90s Republicans
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2023 00:00
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I am rather suspicious of the suggestion of a 'simultaneous emergence of racism and capitalism' Why?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2023 00:45
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:They are voting on a law to implement a new enforceable Scotus code of ethics next week. It won't pass the House. Sounds like a good start. Is there anything else? Do they plan on adding judges?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 18:15
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Nope, that's the only SCOTUS bill they are voting on right now. If the recusal bill is the only thing, that's pretty weak. There's an appetite for more than just that. I don't think there is a significant majority of support either, but that's kind of the issue, right? The democrats aren't really down for something like that. Term limits would be good and I hope they do it, but I'll believe when I see it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 18:24
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:You realize that Roe was repealed explicitly because Republicans were able to focus on the goal of changing the court over the course of 50 years, right? Sometimes things in politics take a while. Giving up and giving in because something will take too long is self-defeating. Didn't the Dems have the chance to actually make it legal across the country to get an abortion?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
zoux posted:
Well, there's these things called bills that get passed in Congress. I remember Obama promising to codify Roe. And I remember the Women's Health Protection Act of 2022 last year.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
zoux posted:Ok, once again, explain to me the legislative process that results in the codification of Roe. We'll just leave aside the obvious eventual SCOTUS ruling on the matter for now, how does that bill (which failed twice btw) become law? Well, typically, a bill gets introduced and co-sponsored. It then goes through a committee and if it survives that, it gets brought to the floor of either/both chambers to be voted on. Again, the Dems apparently had a chance during Obama's admin to codify Roe. I remember him promising to do it. The Dems vowed to codify Roe, but failed despite holding the House and Senate. Mellow Seas posted:Yes. Congress can do those things. You need to have enough votes, though. How many seats we need?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:It took the GOP 50 years to take the court. It might take 50 to get it back. zoux posted:I consider these contextless arguments about "simply doing politics" to be much akin to Dinesh Dsouza talking about how Democrats were the party of slavery. Technically correct, but substantially wrong. Did they or did they not have a chance to codify Roe?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 18:59
|
|
|
zoux posted:The plan is "voting harder" and "for blue no matter who". lmao, that's a terrible plan The "vote blue no matter who" is especially insipid considering that anti-abortion democrats exist
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 19:06
|
|
|
Morrow posted:That's not how it works and you know it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the cloture thing just a senate rule? It's not enshrined in the Constitution.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 19:08
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:It’s part right. On Election Day the best, or sometimes least bad, thing you can do is blue no matter who (unless RFK is the candidate in which case I think the best thing is to hide in a hole.) The actual work of moving a party happens way before that, during primaries where we get actual leftist people on the ballot and at the very local level where we get actual leftist people’s careers started. If you want to vote for someone who is anti-abortion, or anti-trans, or any other regressive democrat, go right ahead. I won't. edit: I want to add that, to me, it seems like the "vote harder" and "vote blue no matter who" plans have been in place for a long, long time now and I'm not happy with the results. Additionally, these plans don't take into account how exhausting it is for people, especially when their lives are on the line. theCalamity fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Jul 13, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 19:19
|
|
|
zoux posted:Ok what's the other plan to quickly get everything we want forever that is easy and not exhausting? Because I agree, we should do that. I don't believe I mentioned the speed. I concede that a lot of things will be exhausting, but currently, the vote harder movement is exhausting with little results. Again, the Dems had a chance to codify Roe and they did not. They had a chance to do a lot of good things, but didn't. Anyway, stop voting blue no matter who. It just puts lovely people in power and gives them more influence to entrench themselves and make it difficult to get rid of them. You reward their bad behavior with power by voting blue no matter who. quote:I wouldn't vote for a transphobe but I don't think that's likely to happen in the Democratic party, which is probably the most LGBT friendly major party anywhere in the world. Didn't we just have a Democrat vote for a transphobic bill in Texas? I know you wouldn't personally vote for such a person, but if she were the only democratic choice, "vote blue no matter who" says that you should vote for the transphobe. Mellow Seas posted:This is not a choice I have ever been faced with, personally, nor have most Democratic voters. Because almost all Democrats voters support those things, and so their candidates do, and those who don’t are a rounding error.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 19:41
|
|
|
zoux posted:Also my calculus on national politics is much different from that on state politics, where we're in such a worse position here that it doesn't really matter what strategy we use. But like I don't care if a politician is personally against abortion if he or she votes for abortion rights. Bigotry is a different matter. Mellow Seas posted:As an aside it is a fun exercise to talk about politics in a context where the most basic ideas like “you are more likely to accomplish things the more you win elections” are constantly challenged
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:No it’s almost exactly the same, because 90% of the argument about whether Dems can change things are not are based on them not doing something that they couldn’t because they didn’t win elections… That's because you're assuming that a Democratic politician is automatically good and wants the things we want. We had plenty of Dems at the beginning of Obama's admin to codify Roe. They held the House and Senate in 2020 and couldn't even get election reform passed. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 20:09
|
|
|
Arab Americans are rethinking about their vote for pro-Israel Democrats https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-revolt-arabs-progressives_n_6536f382e4b011a9cf7abc38 quote:United in a desire to stop mounting bloodshed, a group of about 30 Arab American leaders and activists convened at the Hanini Outreach and Community Center in Dearborn, Michigan, on Oct. 16 to discuss how to respond to the Israeli bombardment of Gaza. The democrats are making a huge misstep in their full support of Israel’s apartheid regime. Thousands of people have been protesting for a free Palestine or a ceasefire, but the democrats have either ignored them or maligned them like Chuck Schumer when he said that those asking for a ceasefire support Hamas or Ritchie Torres attacking people who criticize Israel. They are pushing away the people who would most likely vote for them
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2023 02:33
|
|
|
mutata posted:Yeah, I have little to no patience for dumbasses who don't vote for the obviously less evil candidates under whom various people would have a tangibly higher quality of life (like literally any group other than white men). Take that hand wringing and write a blogpost about it and go vote for people who want to kill and ruin fewer people. I have no time for your boring rear end philosophizing. Should a person who is against the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians vote for those who enable the ethnic cleansing and genocide of Palestinians? Should someone who is pro-choice vote for a Dem who is anti-choice? Or a transphobe?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 06:41
|
|
|
burnishedfume posted:Good points, also remember to not join any socialist organizations or unions or leave your house ever because you might meet a transphobe or an anti-choicer or a genocide apologist. Big difference between meeting someone and voting for them
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 06:54
|
|
|
Thanqol posted:Do you know how politics changes? You know, on a deep, structural level? You win multiple elections in a row. I simply do not have confidence that the Democrats, as a whole, can accomplish much. They had opportunities to codify Roe v Wade, but did not. They had an opportunity to protect our voting rights and failed to do so. They had many opportunities to actually make things better, but didn't. Some of these Democrats are flat out against the goals that I want and I don't want to give them the power to destroy the things that I want to see happen. XboxPants posted:If both options were transphobes, but one of them was a radical Zionist who wanted Palestine completely wiped out, and the other was pushing for a ceasefire leading to an eventual two state solution, then you bet I'd vote for the pro-Palestinian transphobe over the ethnic cleansing transphobe. If I'm going down anyway I'm gonna save as many people as I can on the way down. Main Paineframe posted:We need to get out there and start winning people over
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 07:49
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Time to direct people to my effortpost on reactionary rhetorics again. The argument that specific narrower changes or shifts are insufficient and therefore should not be considered, like the argument that the push for specific changes are futile, are both part of the reactionary playbook used to sabotage good faith discussion. There's a reason Republican talking points targeting Democrats and leftists reliably focus on equivocation between the parties, and setting ever-shifting standards for what counts as "really mattering". A few days ago, McConnell came out and said that he backs Biden on Israel funding. Obama once compared himself to 90s republicans Lucan’s. Schumer suggested going after Republican votes at the expense of Democratic votes. The equivocation is coming from inside the house. And like Gumball, I would very much love to vote for a democrat who doesn’t support genocide here or abroad, who supports free healthcare and all of the other good poo poo we want. I have and will still vote for candidates that support my values, but I won’t vote for those who won’t. Im not going to vote for a leopard who is going to eat my face
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 19:24
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:So go out there and convince other people to support those things you want. Main Paineframe posted:Until your personal wishlist of political essentials is overwhelmingly popular and high on the wishlists of much of the populace, you are going to have to settle for not getting everything you want. Main Paineframe posted:Which is your decision to make, but you don't get to blast people for prioritizing abortion and gay rights over Palestine while you're prioritizing Palestine over their rights. I don’t believe I blasted others for prioritizing abortion and gay rights. If I did, I apologize because that’s not my intention. All I can do is state why I am making the decision that I am. I’m not going to vote for someone who is pro-Israel, a transphobe, anti-choice and other issues.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
Digamma-F-Wau posted:Wait has Biden openly been anti-choice/transphobic? I always figured that he was at worst, someone who probably had a mixed record on those topics in the past that, with becoming president, hasn't done anything to impede most of the rest of the party being pro-choice/pro-trans. As far as I know, he isn’t either anti-choice or a transphobe, but right now he is loving supporting Israel as they genocide Palestinians. Probably should’ve used an “or” there
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
Anyone else feels grossed out that oppressed groups get trotted out and presented as to why another group should continue to be oppressed?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 23:14
|
|
|
predicto posted:Somehow the same people seem to find that same breaking point every single election. The key issues change, the candidates change, the opposition candidates change, but the result is always the same - they always have a reason not to vote. There are Democrats that are anti-choice, transphobes, and are alright with education and social services being cut. The Dems have had chances to pass abortion rights for decades but failed to do so. Last year, they had control of the White House, the House, and the senate, and they failed to pass a law codifying Roe. The GOP has been making it harder to vote in their states and, nationally, the Dems failed to pass a voting rights law that could alleviate that pressure. It’s hard to convince people to vote for the Democrats when the Democrats failed to make it easier to get them elected.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2023 01:05
|
|
|
Mustang posted:How does not voting and the GOP winning more elections improve things in any meaningful way? One side is very clearly better than the other, despite their flaws. I didn’t mention anything about a leftist revolution. It’s hard to convince people to vote for more democrats after they’ve shown that when they’re in control, they won’t do much. No one is waiting for a “perfect” candidate. I simply have a different standard for who I’d vote for compared to you. If you want to call it perfect, go ahead. I just call it the bare minimum. Right now, we have a president who is fully behind the genocide of Palestinians right now and I don’t want to vote for someone like that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2023 01:33
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Serious question that I've asked tons of people and never gotten a straight answer to: It doesn’t make sense and relies on the assumption that a person who doesn’t vote or vote third party would have voted for the Democrats.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2023 03:27
|
|
|
Skex posted:Even regarding Israel and Palestinian the simple fact that Biden has made multiple speeches urging restraint on the part of Israel and reporting indicates that he is still applying pressure to encourage restraint is a loving sea change in the American posture towards Israel. Skex posted:Finally if voting didn't matter why do the Fash spend so much time, money and effort to discourage and stop people from doing it?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2023 04:24
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:That's pretty silly, since the only way to pass the For The People Act (or any other voting rights enhancement you care to name) is for there to be more Democrats in legislatures.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2023 04:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
Skex posted:From a pure pro democracy standpoint I'd rather vote 3rd party than not vote at all. It's a valuable data point to know what people support even if they lose. The Dems are capable of stopping fascism. Right now, we have Biden siding fully with a fascist regime in Israel. Many democrats want to give the police more money. We’ve seen Pelosi campaign for an anti-choice democrat over a progressive. Eric Adams has his police robot and is now wanting to give immigrants a one way ticket out of NYC. How many liberal cities have swept up homeless camps? I’m sorry but they aren’t going to stop fascism. B B posted:The answer is enough to overcome the filibuster, but even then it's not at all clear that Democrats will actually go through with the things they say that they intend to do. As far as I know, they could do away with the filibuster rule with a simple majority vote. When faced with the need to get poo poo done, they failed to even do that. theCalamity fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Oct 28, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2023 04:43
|
|