The direct payments don't come close to outweighing the harm Trump did -- look at the Supreme Court.
The leftist take on Trump should be that he was awful, with no qualifiers. You do not have to hand it to him. Plenty of room to shit on Biden on his own merits.
Try that out on someone who needs an abortion, or who's trans, etc. Ask Iran, where Trump went from actual diplomatic engagement to committing an act of war.
This is the problem with reducing both presidents to a $2K check: it ignores all the incredibly harmful stuff Trump did. To people who remember that stuff or who are still affected by it, "but I got a check" sounds like you don't give a damn about their problem because a fascist covered your rent for a few months three years ago.
We lost abortion while biden was president. If trump had been president the libs would have been angry enough to fight it and we might still have it. Failing that biden could have done anything about these problems. By not doing anything to prevent it the DNC is just as guilty for it as thr GOP
Have you already forgotten how much trump madness effected the liberals? They would have talked about packing the court and the SC would have limited their decision
Realistically biden has dementia so it is unclear just what he is saying separate from being an organ of thr DNC. But if eh had full autonomy he would never try to do anything good. He was a pro segregation senator from Delaware.
What I mean is the Court night notice is the President is suggesting something, not just people in general talking the court. At least that's what I think. I'm not saying Biden, or any potential Democratic president would do that
At least in a blue state there is big difference when a Democrat is in office of not. When they are we get federal funding for projects the state wants. And the federal govt isn't suing the state to block whatever it is doing
I'm talking about abortion, you're talking about climate change. On abortion, there's no question that Democrats are far better than Republicans even though Democrats themselves could do a lot more.
As I said: on abortion, Democrats failed to buy a smoke detector and that's what allowed Republicans to burn the house down.
We agree these are both bad things and both parties are at fault. I'm saying the one that actively goes and does bad things is worse, and I really don't understand how there's an argument on that point. It's just contrarianism. Libs say "hey at least we aren't Republicans," so leftists get tempted to reply "you know what, actually you're worse."
That doesn't make sense either, though. Someone who goes out and burns a building down is a lot worse than someone who was too complacent to install a smoke detector. Doing bad things is worse than being too lazy/cheap/disinterested to do good things.
It's just not. There's a real difference between people who go out of their way to harm others and some feckless lib who's bought into the idea that they can't really do anything absent a supermajority.
Flattening 95% of politically active people in the country to "eh basically the same" is counterproductive in the extreme.
Where do politicians come from, though? Many start off as local activists. Tons of state and local politicians aren't even full-time politicians.
And relentlessly attacking the party inevitably bleeds over into attacking the voters. The left certainly doesn't make this distinction clear, with some openly arguing there's no distinction to begin with. It's just misguided right from the jump and only gets worse from there.
Making that institution the focus of your activism is a misunderstanding.
That's not what I'm suggesting.
You are not going to get me to defend Joe Biden
Also not what I'm suggesting.
All I'm saying is we should recognize the reality that while both parties are bad, Republicans are obviously worse. We're not getting anywhere unless we turn a bunch of libs into leftists, and libs will correctly brush us off if we keep at ridiculous ideas like "Democrats are just as bad as Republicans (and maybe worse!)."
Something that worked for you won't necessarily work for everyone. Yeah, you have to challenge people's ideology, but you you also have to maintain credibility with them. If someone challenges your ideology but lacks credibility you write them off as a crank.
We're talking to people who are skeptical to oppositional. With those people, you can't give them an inch to argue or they'll pounce on it so they can avoid the harder issues you present to them. You want to talk about things where there is as little room for debate as possible, even among libs.
The direct payments don't come close to outweighing the harm Trump did -- look at the Supreme Court.
The leftist take on Trump should be that he was awful, with no qualifiers. You do not have to hand it to him. Plenty of room to shit on Biden on his own merits.
Biden was also awful and bad. I didn't get a check from him. Trump is objectively to the left of biden.
Try that out on someone who needs an abortion, or who's trans, etc. Ask Iran, where Trump went from actual diplomatic engagement to committing an act of war.
This is the problem with reducing both presidents to a $2K check: it ignores all the incredibly harmful stuff Trump did. To people who remember that stuff or who are still affected by it, "but I got a check" sounds like you don't give a damn about their problem because a fascist covered your rent for a few months three years ago.
We lost abortion while biden was president. If trump had been president the libs would have been angry enough to fight it and we might still have it. Failing that biden could have done anything about these problems. By not doing anything to prevent it the DNC is just as guilty for it as thr GOP
How? I just don't see that happening
Maybe people would be angrier but I don't see the way the Court decision playing out differently
Have you already forgotten how much trump madness effected the liberals? They would have talked about packing the court and the SC would have limited their decision
If Biden was talking about it sure. If it's people talking about it with Trump in office, I doubt it
Realistically biden has dementia so it is unclear just what he is saying separate from being an organ of thr DNC. But if eh had full autonomy he would never try to do anything good. He was a pro segregation senator from Delaware.
What I mean is the Court night notice is the President is suggesting something, not just people in general talking the court. At least that's what I think. I'm not saying Biden, or any potential Democratic president would do that
At least in a blue state there is big difference when a Democrat is in office of not. When they are we get federal funding for projects the state wants. And the federal govt isn't suing the state to block whatever it is doing
State politics are not federal politics.
It's weird how eager people are to do this!
Contrarian-brain rounds runs deep in our veins. Fight the addiction, comrades!
deleted by creator
Democrats could have installed a smoke alarm but didn't; Republicans burnt the house down. These are both bad but one is clearly worse.
deleted by creator
I'm talking about abortion, you're talking about climate change. On abortion, there's no question that Democrats are far better than Republicans even though Democrats themselves could do a lot more.
deleted by creator
As I said: on abortion, Democrats failed to buy a smoke detector and that's what allowed Republicans to burn the house down.
We agree these are both bad things and both parties are at fault. I'm saying the one that actively goes and does bad things is worse, and I really don't understand how there's an argument on that point. It's just contrarianism. Libs say "hey at least we aren't Republicans," so leftists get tempted to reply "you know what, actually you're worse."
deleted by creator
That doesn't make sense either, though. Someone who goes out and burns a building down is a lot worse than someone who was too complacent to install a smoke detector. Doing bad things is worse than being too lazy/cheap/disinterested to do good things.
deleted by creator
It's just not. There's a real difference between people who go out of their way to harm others and some feckless lib who's bought into the idea that they can't really do anything absent a supermajority.
Flattening 95% of politically active people in the country to "eh basically the same" is counterproductive in the extreme.
deleted by creator
How do you expect to build a mass leftist movement if you write off basically everyone who's politically active right from the jump?
deleted by creator
Where do politicians come from, though? Many start off as local activists. Tons of state and local politicians aren't even full-time politicians.
And relentlessly attacking the party inevitably bleeds over into attacking the voters. The left certainly doesn't make this distinction clear, with some openly arguing there's no distinction to begin with. It's just misguided right from the jump and only gets worse from there.
deleted by creator
That's not what I'm suggesting.
Also not what I'm suggesting.
All I'm saying is we should recognize the reality that while both parties are bad, Republicans are obviously worse. We're not getting anywhere unless we turn a bunch of libs into leftists, and libs will correctly brush us off if we keep at ridiculous ideas like "Democrats are just as bad as Republicans (and maybe worse!)."
deleted by creator
Something that worked for you won't necessarily work for everyone. Yeah, you have to challenge people's ideology, but you you also have to maintain credibility with them. If someone challenges your ideology but lacks credibility you write them off as a crank.
We're talking to people who are skeptical to oppositional. With those people, you can't give them an inch to argue or they'll pounce on it so they can avoid the harder issues you present to them. You want to talk about things where there is as little room for debate as possible, even among libs.