• nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    They have to be careful about the stuff they pretend to support, what if the GOP were devious and voted yes? Then Biden would have to veto it and that might make the voters he despises not like him.

    • the_post_of_tom_joad [any, any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      The GOP might be devious but they have the same masters as the Dems, and even something like a chance to fuck the Dems cannot break the "nothing must materially improve" rule both party's moneymen agree on

    • the_post_of_tom_joad [any, any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      I loved finding out how that worked. "Picking" between the extremely expensive insurance choices in the... What did they call it? The marketplace? Ahhh yes i remember watching the Democrats dismantle their own bill, and trying to use "Obama's great achievement". That was quite a lesson for my still-dem-voting self.

      • Cummunism [they/them, he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        there were some good things that came out of it, like covering people til theyre 26 and better covereage of preventative care(my colonoscopies are covered) but yea, the rest of it was some bullshit. The marketplace was mostly a rip off and a super high deductible joke.

        • Wertheimer [any]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Obamacare saved my friend's life (when he was 25), but was a major factor in what killed him (ten years later).

          • Cummunism [they/them, he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            shit, im sorry. im curious to what the factor is, but i also do not fault you for not elaborating.

            • Wertheimer [any]
              ·
              1 year ago

              Thanks. Ultimately it was a "death of despair," and much of that despair was either caused or exacerbated by the low quality of medical and mental health care that's available to the poor in this country, and the debt and unemployability that resulted from it. Other factors existed, but if we had universal health care he would still be alive today.

        • Orannis62 [ze/hir]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah the medicaid expansion and banning denial for "pre existing conditions" were good, everything else was a handout to insurance companies

  • JohnBrownNote [comrade/them, des/pair]
    ·
    1 year ago

    they don't want to win, they fundraise more when they lose and which party is in charge doesn't affect the congressional insider trading

  • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the Republicans called their bluff they'd either have some of the democratic senators "break ranks" to vote against it and/or Biden would veto it like how he said he'd veto Medicare For All. The Democratic party as a whole doesn't want to enact policy and they don't want a majority such that they have no excuses not to do so. They just want to fundraise...cause that's all this shit is. America is just grifts all the way down.

  • Infamousblt [any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    If good things happen then how can they convince you that the world is horrible and only they can protect you from it?

  • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    On the one hand, that would genuinely be a good policy that would benefit millions of people.

    On the other, I'm imagining the Republican attack ads that show you pictures of crying children in dental chairs while a scary voice over screams "This is what Joe Biden wants to do to your kids!"

    And yet, on a third hand, I am excited to see a bunch of QAnon activists with bleeding gums doing flash mobs where they try and shut down a dentist's trade conference.

  • iridaniotter [she/her]
    ·
    1 year ago

    US liberals may be concerned about winning, but the party cares more about fundraising than winning.

  • the_post_of_tom_joad [any, any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    At some point the Dems became what they claim the Republicans are, obstructionists. What are they campaigning on besides "stopping fascism"? They seem rather poor at stopping it too but that's just because we don't understand politics/support them hard enough.

    vote

  • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Weilding state power is authoritarian. It has the potential to materially improve working class living conditions, but does nothing to express your essential, moral purity.

    Being less glib, every wedge idea like this is predicated on recognizing and participating in class conflict. The liberals that have influence in the party are profoundly uninterested in class conflict, and often don't even accept that it's even a real phenomenon.

    • leftofthat [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      The liberals that have influence in the party are profoundly uninterested in class conflict

      I agree with this. They will often just compartmentalize it to be a matter of "law and order." A lot feel good about just keeping their head down and supporting the police, etc., knowing they won't be the one acted upon with violence.

      The ones that dance on the edge of class conflict will just focus on the "middle class" to avoid an actual class analysis.

  • Maoo [none/use name]
    ·
    1 year ago

    You assume that liberals have a strategy beyond guilting and nagging.

  • Kaplya
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The goal of neoliberal Democrats = how to help rich people get richer by using the power of the state to enforce the free market

    The goal of neoliberal mixed with Austrian libertarian Republicans = how to help rich people get richer by minimizing the state interference in the free market

    That’s the ideological battle between both sides. You’re not asking the right question.

  • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don't think US liberals have any specific connection to the Democratic party apparatus. The party does whatever regardless of their base's demands. The Democratic Party has successfully become a rorschach for liberals, they see it doing whatever they want it to be doing.

    Liberals within the party or large donors are the actual apparatus and they're all lanyard wearing ghouls. I can't think of any instance since the civil rights movement or Vietnam protests that widespread public sentiment made the Democrats do anything.

  • barrbaric [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    It's far more important that they not do anything than that they win.