Consequentially saying the dems are shit resulted in authoritarianism
So yeah
But what that user was saying is that 90% of the posts on Lemmy about Dems shitting beds are made by Tankies who unapologetically support Trump and Putin.
The last time Dems had the power to pass almost everything they wanted we got almost universal healthcare. So, I’d venture to say a single 4 year term of no-coalition-required dem control would do it, but a decent chunk of the Supreme Court would have to croak first, or get impeached I guess but I’m not sure how that works for the SC.
FYI, this is pretty much what the Republicans have right now, it’s called a trifecta. Unless a few more of Republicans suddenly sprout a moral compass, we are well and truly fucked.
No, we got a massive hand out to insurance companies in exchange for letting everyone get insurance (if they can afford it)
Things like standards of care have killed private practice and have made it so where the required paperwork is a larger part of a doctor’s job than medicine. It helped the consolidation of health systems, which has made the problems far bigger
Let’s not forget, this concept was an older plan by the heritage foundation (who have released countless hits like project 2025) to avoid universal healthcare. The Democrats then negotiated it to be worse from there
All of that was the direct result of having a coalition majority and not a dem super majority. If the Dems had a trifecta without having to rely on “Dems” from red states basically just being Republicans from the 80’s, it would have been better. Keep in mind 34 Democrats still voted against the ACA. It was a shoestring and bubblegum coalition that broke down immediately in political terms. Shitloads of compromises because they had to bring in support from those conservative “Dems”.
(US politics actually has several sub-party groups that don’t identify as a party independent from their actual party.)
Consequentially saying the dems are shit resulted in authoritarianism
More like, the dems being shit resulted in authoritarianism. Republicans fight hard to implement fascism, democrats fight hard to keep the status quo, even as it grows more fascist.
democrats fight hard to keep the status quo to get money from their donors.
I’m not kidding, everything about the Democrats starts making sense when you look at them through this lens, right down to their praising Nancy Pelosi for her fundraising ability. They don’t care about votes as long as they get their money.
Fighting for the people means they lose the capitalists that want to make profit from those people without intervention, so they won’t do it except to the extent that it keeps up the appearance of being a viable party. Anything else would be bad for business.
They can’t be anti-war and anti-genocide because they won’t get money from weapons manufacturers and other war profiteers.
They can’t be anti-oil or anti-coal because they won’t get money from the wealthiest profiteers of the energy sector.
They can’t fight for public transport because they would lose the automotive industry.
They can’t go after landlords and their vacant homes (instead choosing to address the housing crisis through exclusionary benefits and deregulation) because they will lose the real estate moguls.
They can’t fight for universal healthcare because they will lose the insurance and healthcare executives.
They can’t allow third parties to be viable because it would encroach on their fundraising.
And they absolutely cannot name the economic recession for what it is or challenge republicans by giving real reasons for it because they would have to attack their donors to do so.
The only moment any of this changes is when their gaslighting ceases to work on the voters, and they make concessions in order to remain relevant. But they will always return to form as soon as the voters divert their attention, which makes the Republican spectacle actually really convenient for them. So it also makes a lot of sense why the Democrats would have propped up Trump for the 2016 election, and then re-hired the same campaign managers that lost that election for the 2024 election.
All this to say; the Democrats are not the answer. Do not fall for their rhetoric.
I mean
Consequentially saying the dems are shit resulted in authoritarianism
So yeah
But what that user was saying is that 90% of the posts on Lemmy about Dems shitting beds are made by Tankies who unapologetically support Trump and Putin.
How many centuries of power would the Democrat need to do what they’re elected for?
The last time Dems had the power to pass almost everything they wanted we got almost universal healthcare. So, I’d venture to say a single 4 year term of no-coalition-required dem control would do it, but a decent chunk of the Supreme Court would have to croak first, or get impeached I guess but I’m not sure how that works for the SC.
FYI, this is pretty much what the Republicans have right now, it’s called a trifecta. Unless a few more of Republicans suddenly sprout a moral compass, we are well and truly fucked.
No, we got a massive hand out to insurance companies in exchange for letting everyone get insurance (if they can afford it)
Things like standards of care have killed private practice and have made it so where the required paperwork is a larger part of a doctor’s job than medicine. It helped the consolidation of health systems, which has made the problems far bigger
Let’s not forget, this concept was an older plan by the heritage foundation (who have released countless hits like project 2025) to avoid universal healthcare. The Democrats then negotiated it to be worse from there
All of that was the direct result of having a coalition majority and not a dem super majority. If the Dems had a trifecta without having to rely on “Dems” from red states basically just being Republicans from the 80’s, it would have been better. Keep in mind 34 Democrats still voted against the ACA. It was a shoestring and bubblegum coalition that broke down immediately in political terms. Shitloads of compromises because they had to bring in support from those conservative “Dems”.
(US politics actually has several sub-party groups that don’t identify as a party independent from their actual party.)
How long have you been leading a large organization?
Well, longer than that.
More like, the dems being shit resulted in authoritarianism. Republicans fight hard to implement fascism, democrats fight hard to keep the status quo, even as it grows more fascist.
democrats fight hard
to keep the status quoto get money from their donors.I’m not kidding, everything about the Democrats starts making sense when you look at them through this lens, right down to their praising Nancy Pelosi for her fundraising ability. They don’t care about votes as long as they get their money.
Fighting for the people means they lose the capitalists that want to make profit from those people without intervention, so they won’t do it except to the extent that it keeps up the appearance of being a viable party. Anything else would be bad for business.
They can’t be anti-war and anti-genocide because they won’t get money from weapons manufacturers and other war profiteers.
They can’t be anti-oil or anti-coal because they won’t get money from the wealthiest profiteers of the energy sector.
They can’t fight for public transport because they would lose the automotive industry.
They can’t go after landlords and their vacant homes (instead choosing to address the housing crisis through exclusionary benefits and deregulation) because they will lose the real estate moguls.
They can’t fight for universal healthcare because they will lose the insurance and healthcare executives.
They can’t allow third parties to be viable because it would encroach on their fundraising.
And they absolutely cannot name the economic recession for what it is or challenge republicans by giving real reasons for it because they would have to attack their donors to do so.
The only moment any of this changes is when their gaslighting ceases to work on the voters, and they make concessions in order to remain relevant. But they will always return to form as soon as the voters divert their attention, which makes the Republican spectacle actually really convenient for them. So it also makes a lot of sense why the Democrats would have propped up Trump for the 2016 election, and then re-hired the same campaign managers that lost that election for the 2024 election.
All this to say; the Democrats are not the answer. Do not fall for their rhetoric.