The last time the Democrats controlled the presidency, senate and house was during Obama, and it was only for like 100 days. Thats how obamacare passed. And despite being very flawed, it is one of the biggest improvements in the quality of life of millions of people.
Most of the time, the Democrats cant pass shit, because young, leftist voters, dont vote.
But yeah, continue not voting, punish the not perfect Democrats, give absolute power to maga. Surely that will bring the proletariat revolution into existence.
If tens of millions of people suffer and die in the meantime, what can you do, thats the price of the revolution. Thankfully, your middle class white status shields you from the consequences of your virtue signaling.
Just the destruction of USAID will cause hundreds of of thousands of deaths, mostly in Africa. Millions of people have been imprisoned and deported. And in before “Obama was deporter in chief”, 95% of Obama’s deportations happened either at the border or after someone was arrested(for a different crime).
If you have a latin friend, ask them if they were afraid existing when Obama was president, in comparison to now, where people are afraid to pick up their kids from school.
It’s wild that you think strong democratic majorities will pass laws that help the working class when there are several states where this is the case and they don’t pass significant redistributive social policies.
Why can’t democratic trifecta states right now pass $25/hr minimum wage tethered to inflation? Or state run universal healthcare? Because their donor base is also composed of billionaires and cadres of business owners. What’s more after a few cycles in office, they routinely leverage information asymmetries available as part of their supposed oversight roles to make money in stocks, become exceedingly wealthy and more detached from the needs of working people.
The Democrats have exclusively run pro-business national candidates for the past 35 years. It’s naive to think without serious pressure from the Left (whether that’s internal DSA pressure or something else) they’ll put forward policies that actually help the working class. If someone doesn’t want to be in your big tent with AIPAC, pro-business sycophants you portray them as ideological purists. Unreal.
Why can’t democratic trifecta states right now pass $25/hr minimum wage tethered to inflation?
Most states with a democrat governor have 15$+ minimum wage. So the democrats have already done that. It is good enough? No, but it is better than nothing.
If someone doesn’t want to be in your big tent with AIPAC, pro-business sycophants you portray them as ideological purists.
Bernie literally almost won the democratic primary. But nowadays, not even Bernie or AOC are good enough for modern leftists, because they prefer Israel to continue existing.
I am not an american btw, but your first priority as an american should be to get rid of the literal nazis. This isnt about policies, this is about the foundation of a democratic state. This is what is at stake.
Look at Hungary. Is Magyar a good guy? No, but that was secondary to the main fucking point, which was getting rid of Orban and his cronies. This is why everyone, both left and right, supported Magyar. Will it last? Probably not, but at least maybe now Hungary can slowly become a normal country.
It’s naive to think without serious pressure from the Left
The time to reform the democratic party is during the primaries and the time to put extra pressure is when the democratic party is in a position to actually do things. Once the democratic party is in charge, we can start talking about policies(as the main issue), we can start talking about reforming the electoral “winner takes all” system, etc.
Ask yourself, where are all those student protests about Palestine nowadays? The radical leftists are the biggest opposition of the Democrat party and intentionally or unintentionally the biggest supporter of Trump. The no kings protests were the biggest protests in the history of the US and you still had tons of permanently online leftists shitting on them for some reason.
History doesnt repeat itself but it often rhymes. From the wikipedia article on the communist german party(KPD), before the nazis took over
In this period, while also opposed to the Nazis, the KPD regarded the Nazi Party as a less sophisticated and thus less dangerous fascist party than the SPD, and KPD leader Ernst Thälmann declared that “some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest [of social democrats]”.
We have been doing the “both sides are the same” since the beginning of time. But no, both sides are not the same. A shitty side that at least respects some basic democratic foundations is preferable to the literal nazis.
There is no communism, there is no democracy, there are no pro worker policies, there is no dialogue, there are no elections, if you have literal fascists in charge.
What can I say: your analysis is just wrong based on recent history, and I fundamentally don’t agree with it.
It is not a winning electoral strategy to deny that there are inherent and accelerating economic issues, being experienced by the majority of working people in this country. It’s obvious that failing to made a compelling appeal to the working class and delivering policies that continue to exacerbate wealth inequality have led to string electoral losses for Democrats. “Now is not the time” has been the same message from the Clinton wing for decades at this point.
Continuing down this path is precisely what has allowed the Right to claim a Bonapartist coalition of disgruntled, alienated working people and is marching us right down the road to Fascism.
Working people can feel the pain of economic exploitation increasing over time while they receive a lower share of wages for increased productivity. A Democratic pitch, which is based in returning to normalcy that is not livable is not a winning pitch.
They absolutely were not, unless you know so little about how the US government works that you think a 50-50 senate split and a 6-3 Republican majority supreme court counts as a trifecta?
Trifecta has nothing to do with the Supreme Court and it doesn’t matter the size of the majority (50(+1)-50 is still a majority) just that you have one in both houses.
Trifecta = 3 branches of government. Executive, Judicial, and Legislative. It makes no more sense to break Congress up into two branches than it would to break the Executive branch up by all KF the various agencies under the president.
It was the Supreme Court that decided to overturn Row vs Wade during Biden’s term. It was the Supreme Court that decided to strike down his executive order forgiving federal student loans. Essentially the same Supreme Court that decided to hand Trump a blank note saying “do what you want” stymied the Biden administration repeatedly.
Claiming that the majority in the Senate matters for anything other than the annual reconciliation bill shows how little you know about how the Senate works. A majority does not give effective control in either chamber, though the Democrats did have the numbers to control the House. Even the “50” you claim has to include independent senators who caucased with the Democrats, not actual registered Democrats, to get there.
So like, if you just want to spread Republican propaganda about how bad the Democrats are in an attempt to get their voters to stay home on election day, you can go ahead and say stuff like that. You’re spreading lies that help conservatives.
If you want to do an actual good-faith evaluation of when the Democrats have had the power necessary to do anything, you can look back through history and find that the only period of time they have had that control in the last 50 years was when they passed the ACA, and that was only for a few months, not a full two years.
I mean, your definition does make internal sense, but that’s not a government trifecta. You can start defining things whatever you want, but please don’t get mad at others when they don’t agree with your own made up definitions.
ACA was basically a Republican policy (its literally modeled after Romneycare) and was lobbied for by Insurance companies, so of course it got passed.
And, no, I’m not spreading “republican propaganda”. Both the democrats and republicans are incapable of governing because they’re uninterested in governing. But the democrats, unlike the republicans, can be reformed away from this. Lying about when they last held power won’t help reform them out of this situation. They constantly have the ball and then do nothing because their donors want nothing to get done.
Oh I think I recognize you from arguing on Reddit many years ago. Not many people would call the ACA a Republican bill- the Massachusetts bill it was based on was still substantially different, but was written and passed by a predominanly Democrat legislature and Romney got to put his name on it because he was governor, even after he failed to cut a lot of the parts he didn’t like because they were too nice to poor people. Its absolutely silly to call it Romneycare.
Liberal simps always like to bring up the fact that Democrats have almost never had a 60 vote majority in the Senate, saying that’s why Dems can’t do anything. Yet that never seems to be a barrier to Republicans.
Can you imagine a Democratic president threatening to cut off healthcare dollars to hospitals that don’t provide trans-affirming healthcare?
The reason you can’t is the problem with the Democratic party. Republicans are willing to use every scrap of authority they have. They find creative uses for using what procedural powers they have to accomplish incredible things with just the power of the executive branch. Democrats bitch that they can’t do anything unless they have 60 votes in the Senate. There’s always some other excuse for why they can’t get something done.
Can you imagine a Democratic president threatening to cut off healthcare dollars to hospitals that don’t provide trans-affirming healthcare?
Maybe they’re looking for measures that won’t harm all of the other people in said hospitals? How the fuck can anyone be stupid enough to think this is moral or viable policy.
More specifically, this does illustrate why Democrats lose. You need to think of it more as a protest or strike. Sometimes grinding a nation to a standstill is necessary to protect rights, freedoms, or human dignity. Minority groups often have to bring entire societies to their knees in order to have a hope of having their voices heard. Every strike. Every disruptive protest. All are designed to force the majority to stop ignoring the rights and needs of the minority. Sometimes the majority has to be harmed to protect the minority.
But to liberals like yourself, it’s completely unthinkable to you to risk harming the majority to protect the lives of minorities. But ultimately that’s what every protest movement has to do - it has to cause disruption. Republicans have no problem using the healthcare of the majority to hurt minorities. They know that people like yourself will go, “well, I’m not going to speak up, I’m not one of those people. I don’t care if they come for them first. I’m not one of them, greatest good for the greatest number. If the choice is that the hospital either stops offering healthcare to a demonized minority group or stop offering healthcare to everyone, I guess we’ll just have to stop offering healthcare to the demonized minority group.”
Biden could have said, “you know what? It’s our job to provide healthcare to all Americans. Trans people have to pay taxes just like anyone else. If your state is going to start taking away the healthcare from demonized minority groups, then no more federal healthcare dollars for your state. You can have federal dollars when you stop acting like filthy animals.”
We passed bills just fine for TWO HUNDRED YEARS before we ever made up this “filibuster avoidance” bullshit.
They call it the “nuclear option” for exactly this reason… weenies are scared to even discuss it. It’s not nuclear. Nothing blows up. It’s just a majority vote.
They put it to the side whenever they want, since it’s a simple parliamentary procedure. Hundreds of exceptions. Nothing blows up.
Put on your big boy pants and read about it, don’t be frightened
No, you don’t. They blow past the filibuster (which they don’t even do any more, they “call it” with no actual filibuster every occurring) with the “nuclear option” whenever they want to. Simple majority vote.
Filibuster is not in constitution, super majority requirement is a parliamentary rule ONLY, not law… they bypass it all of the time, over 200 “exceptions” the last time I looked.
You’ve been suckered… and that’s why they do this. Most are oblivious, just how they like it
Democrats never use the powers they actually do have, to pass the changes they could pass. Why would you trust them with more power?
What is it they could have passed but apparently chose not to? Barely having a tenuous majority isn’t some insane advantage - we barely gave them enough power to do anything. Instead, you stupidly give more power to Republicans and then pretend both parties are the same.
They could always have used the “nuclear option” and passed actual universal healthcare instead of our strange hybrid for-profit insurance monster under Obama, but they didn’t want to.
When Biden was the President, Ds had majority in house and senate (117th). They COULD have used the stupidly named “nuclear option” and passed universal healthcare, higher minimum wages, and more in response to the nightmarish Trump presidency
But… nah
(encourage everyone to check out the super-majority fiasco fillibuster-not-really nuclear option bullshit song and dance)
They could always have used the “nuclear option” and passed actual universal healthcare instead of our strange hybrid for-profit insurance monster under Obama, but they didn’t want to.
You know why neither side is stupid enough to do that, right?
what’s stupid is allowing a ‘fillibuster’ to wreck legislation.
It’s a parliamentary procedure, not even law. We can change it at ANY TIME with simple majority vote. It’s a self-imposed rule, not in the constitution, not law.
They “stupidly” skip it all of the time with legislation they want to pass. They don’t need a super majority for pay raises…
The last time the Democrats controlled the presidency, senate and house was during Obama, and it was only for like 100 days. Thats how obamacare passed. And despite being very flawed, it is one of the biggest improvements in the quality of life of millions of people.
Most of the time, the Democrats cant pass shit, because young, leftist voters, dont vote.
But yeah, continue not voting, punish the not perfect Democrats, give absolute power to maga. Surely that will bring the proletariat revolution into existence.
If tens of millions of people suffer and die in the meantime, what can you do, thats the price of the revolution. Thankfully, your middle class white status shields you from the consequences of your virtue signaling.
Just the destruction of USAID will cause hundreds of of thousands of deaths, mostly in Africa. Millions of people have been imprisoned and deported. And in before “Obama was deporter in chief”, 95% of Obama’s deportations happened either at the border or after someone was arrested(for a different crime).
If you have a latin friend, ask them if they were afraid existing when Obama was president, in comparison to now, where people are afraid to pick up their kids from school.
It’s wild that you think strong democratic majorities will pass laws that help the working class when there are several states where this is the case and they don’t pass significant redistributive social policies.
Why can’t democratic trifecta states right now pass $25/hr minimum wage tethered to inflation? Or state run universal healthcare? Because their donor base is also composed of billionaires and cadres of business owners. What’s more after a few cycles in office, they routinely leverage information asymmetries available as part of their supposed oversight roles to make money in stocks, become exceedingly wealthy and more detached from the needs of working people.
The Democrats have exclusively run pro-business national candidates for the past 35 years. It’s naive to think without serious pressure from the Left (whether that’s internal DSA pressure or something else) they’ll put forward policies that actually help the working class. If someone doesn’t want to be in your big tent with AIPAC, pro-business sycophants you portray them as ideological purists. Unreal.
Most states with a democrat governor have 15$+ minimum wage. So the democrats have already done that. It is good enough? No, but it is better than nothing.
Bernie literally almost won the democratic primary. But nowadays, not even Bernie or AOC are good enough for modern leftists, because they prefer Israel to continue existing.
I am not an american btw, but your first priority as an american should be to get rid of the literal nazis. This isnt about policies, this is about the foundation of a democratic state. This is what is at stake.
Look at Hungary. Is Magyar a good guy? No, but that was secondary to the main fucking point, which was getting rid of Orban and his cronies. This is why everyone, both left and right, supported Magyar. Will it last? Probably not, but at least maybe now Hungary can slowly become a normal country.
The time to reform the democratic party is during the primaries and the time to put extra pressure is when the democratic party is in a position to actually do things. Once the democratic party is in charge, we can start talking about policies(as the main issue), we can start talking about reforming the electoral “winner takes all” system, etc.
Ask yourself, where are all those student protests about Palestine nowadays? The radical leftists are the biggest opposition of the Democrat party and intentionally or unintentionally the biggest supporter of Trump. The no kings protests were the biggest protests in the history of the US and you still had tons of permanently online leftists shitting on them for some reason.
History doesnt repeat itself but it often rhymes. From the wikipedia article on the communist german party(KPD), before the nazis took over
We have been doing the “both sides are the same” since the beginning of time. But no, both sides are not the same. A shitty side that at least respects some basic democratic foundations is preferable to the literal nazis.
There is no communism, there is no democracy, there are no pro worker policies, there is no dialogue, there are no elections, if you have literal fascists in charge.
What can I say: your analysis is just wrong based on recent history, and I fundamentally don’t agree with it.
It is not a winning electoral strategy to deny that there are inherent and accelerating economic issues, being experienced by the majority of working people in this country. It’s obvious that failing to made a compelling appeal to the working class and delivering policies that continue to exacerbate wealth inequality have led to string electoral losses for Democrats. “Now is not the time” has been the same message from the Clinton wing for decades at this point.
Continuing down this path is precisely what has allowed the Right to claim a Bonapartist coalition of disgruntled, alienated working people and is marching us right down the road to Fascism.
Working people can feel the pain of economic exploitation increasing over time while they receive a lower share of wages for increased productivity. A Democratic pitch, which is based in returning to normalcy that is not livable is not a winning pitch.
Biden’s first two years were a trifecta. Why you lying?
They absolutely were not, unless you know so little about how the US government works that you think a 50-50 senate split and a 6-3 Republican majority supreme court counts as a trifecta?
Trifecta has nothing to do with the Supreme Court and it doesn’t matter the size of the majority (50(+1)-50 is still a majority) just that you have one in both houses.
Trifecta = 3 branches of government. Executive, Judicial, and Legislative. It makes no more sense to break Congress up into two branches than it would to break the Executive branch up by all KF the various agencies under the president.
It was the Supreme Court that decided to overturn Row vs Wade during Biden’s term. It was the Supreme Court that decided to strike down his executive order forgiving federal student loans. Essentially the same Supreme Court that decided to hand Trump a blank note saying “do what you want” stymied the Biden administration repeatedly.
Claiming that the majority in the Senate matters for anything other than the annual reconciliation bill shows how little you know about how the Senate works. A majority does not give effective control in either chamber, though the Democrats did have the numbers to control the House. Even the “50” you claim has to include independent senators who caucased with the Democrats, not actual registered Democrats, to get there.
So like, if you just want to spread Republican propaganda about how bad the Democrats are in an attempt to get their voters to stay home on election day, you can go ahead and say stuff like that. You’re spreading lies that help conservatives.
If you want to do an actual good-faith evaluation of when the Democrats have had the power necessary to do anything, you can look back through history and find that the only period of time they have had that control in the last 50 years was when they passed the ACA, and that was only for a few months, not a full two years.
I mean, your definition does make internal sense, but that’s not a government trifecta. You can start defining things whatever you want, but please don’t get mad at others when they don’t agree with your own made up definitions.
ACA was basically a Republican policy (its literally modeled after Romneycare) and was lobbied for by Insurance companies, so of course it got passed.
And, no, I’m not spreading “republican propaganda”. Both the democrats and republicans are incapable of governing because they’re uninterested in governing. But the democrats, unlike the republicans, can be reformed away from this. Lying about when they last held power won’t help reform them out of this situation. They constantly have the ball and then do nothing because their donors want nothing to get done.
Oh I think I recognize you from arguing on Reddit many years ago. Not many people would call the ACA a Republican bill- the Massachusetts bill it was based on was still substantially different, but was written and passed by a predominanly Democrat legislature and Romney got to put his name on it because he was governor, even after he failed to cut a lot of the parts he didn’t like because they were too nice to poor people. Its absolutely silly to call it Romneycare.
Bud, you’re just wrong. It’s about having control of each step of the legislative process.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/117th_United_States_Congress
Yes, the 50-50 split SHOULD be a D majority, because VP can cast tie-breaker
There’s zero need for a super majority. They blow past that all of the time with simple majority vote. Called “nuclear option”.
Ah yes, the “nuclear option” certainly must be somethibg the government can casually undertake without consequence, right?
Just like how Lincoln lifting Habeus Corpus was a tool used for good and was never used for anything bad at any point by any future government?
Liberal simps always like to bring up the fact that Democrats have almost never had a 60 vote majority in the Senate, saying that’s why Dems can’t do anything. Yet that never seems to be a barrier to Republicans.
Can you imagine a Democratic president threatening to cut off healthcare dollars to hospitals that don’t provide trans-affirming healthcare?
The reason you can’t is the problem with the Democratic party. Republicans are willing to use every scrap of authority they have. They find creative uses for using what procedural powers they have to accomplish incredible things with just the power of the executive branch. Democrats bitch that they can’t do anything unless they have 60 votes in the Senate. There’s always some other excuse for why they can’t get something done.
Maybe they’re looking for measures that won’t harm all of the other people in said hospitals? How the fuck can anyone be stupid enough to think this is moral or viable policy.
More specifically, this does illustrate why Democrats lose. You need to think of it more as a protest or strike. Sometimes grinding a nation to a standstill is necessary to protect rights, freedoms, or human dignity. Minority groups often have to bring entire societies to their knees in order to have a hope of having their voices heard. Every strike. Every disruptive protest. All are designed to force the majority to stop ignoring the rights and needs of the minority. Sometimes the majority has to be harmed to protect the minority.
But to liberals like yourself, it’s completely unthinkable to you to risk harming the majority to protect the lives of minorities. But ultimately that’s what every protest movement has to do - it has to cause disruption. Republicans have no problem using the healthcare of the majority to hurt minorities. They know that people like yourself will go, “well, I’m not going to speak up, I’m not one of those people. I don’t care if they come for them first. I’m not one of them, greatest good for the greatest number. If the choice is that the hospital either stops offering healthcare to a demonized minority group or stop offering healthcare to everyone, I guess we’ll just have to stop offering healthcare to the demonized minority group.”
Biden could have said, “you know what? It’s our job to provide healthcare to all Americans. Trans people have to pay taxes just like anyone else. If your state is going to start taking away the healthcare from demonized minority groups, then no more federal healthcare dollars for your state. You can have federal dollars when you stop acting like filthy animals.”
That’s funny, Democrats won in 2020 without killing tens of thousands of innocent people in hospitals.
Killing non-trans people doesn’t help trans people. It’s fucking psychotic.
I don’t know. Ask a Republican.
You’re advocating doing the same thing, you fucking moron.
We passed bills just fine for TWO HUNDRED YEARS before we ever made up this “filibuster avoidance” bullshit.
They call it the “nuclear option” for exactly this reason… weenies are scared to even discuss it. It’s not nuclear. Nothing blows up. It’s just a majority vote.
They put it to the side whenever they want, since it’s a simple parliamentary procedure. Hundreds of exceptions. Nothing blows up.
Put on your big boy pants and read about it, don’t be frightened
Just because the democrats technically have majority, doesnt mean that they do. You had people like Manchin, blocking everything.
Majority= majority.
They could have taken care of Manchin in many ways… he “took one for the team”
It was not a strong enough majority to push things through. And typical Republicans were being a wall
Need a strong enough majority to override a filibuster
They haven’t had that since the 70s
No, you don’t. They blow past the filibuster (which they don’t even do any more, they “call it” with no actual filibuster every occurring) with the “nuclear option” whenever they want to. Simple majority vote.
Filibuster is not in constitution, super majority requirement is a parliamentary rule ONLY, not law… they bypass it all of the time, over 200 “exceptions” the last time I looked.
You’ve been suckered… and that’s why they do this. Most are oblivious, just how they like it
They WOULD do it, that’s why threatening to do it actually works.
They WON’T do it, most of them can’t even stand for an hour… let alone make any real effort.
And if they did… well, that’s okay. They don’t need 5 months “recess” a year.
“oh no, that guy will talk all day.” fucking Christ
2021, under Biden
That’s only true if you count independent senators as Democrats for some reason.
Maybe for this reason.
Did you forget to edit the article before you linked it or something?
Why are you so aggressive and disingenuous? You can look at the link and see that it’s directed to #cite_note-independent-6, which states,
Biden didn’t fail to pass legislation because of Bernie Sanders and Angus King…
Democrats never use the powers they actually do have, to pass the changes they could pass. Why would you trust them with more power?
What is it they could have passed but apparently chose not to? Barely having a tenuous majority isn’t some insane advantage - we barely gave them enough power to do anything. Instead, you stupidly give more power to Republicans and then pretend both parties are the same.
I didn’t say anything about legislation.
They could always have used the “nuclear option” and passed actual universal healthcare instead of our strange hybrid for-profit insurance monster under Obama, but they didn’t want to.
When Biden was the President, Ds had majority in house and senate (117th). They COULD have used the stupidly named “nuclear option” and passed universal healthcare, higher minimum wages, and more in response to the nightmarish Trump presidency
But… nah
(encourage everyone to check out the super-majority fiasco fillibuster-not-really nuclear option bullshit song and dance)
You know why neither side is stupid enough to do that, right?
because if to get actually pass the agenda they run on, they can’t threaten not to get it passed in the next election
what’s stupid is allowing a ‘fillibuster’ to wreck legislation.
It’s a parliamentary procedure, not even law. We can change it at ANY TIME with simple majority vote. It’s a self-imposed rule, not in the constitution, not law.
They “stupidly” skip it all of the time with legislation they want to pass. They don’t need a super majority for pay raises…