FORCE THE DAMN VOTE we don't have to wait until 2028 for the battlelines to be drawn, do it now in the middle of the pandemic when the ambient political pressure is at its maximum
If people don't realize now that their elected officials don't care about them with a measly $600 check after months of nothing, how is a failed vote on m4a going to radicalize anyone?
I'm legitimately asking, I tried on r*ddit and just got yelled at. Just seems like it is pointless to put so much effort into something like a lost vote for something that probably won't do anything to radicalize normies. No one (that isn't already radicalized to some degree) cares that Joe is president and said he'd veto it, so how is this different?
Liberals will just run saying they believe in healthcare as a right while not supporting m4a in primaries to trick people just like ossof is doing in ga now
Who says that paltry $600 check isn't going to radicalize anyone? It will and personally I wouldn't use reddit as a means to gauge the attitudes of the populace, it's an astro-turfed and censored website, it doesn't represent anyone we should care about
People are getting radicalizing out there comrade, and we need to push for any potential scenario that intensifies the contradictions, and forcing the vote on M4A is one of them
Yeah definitely didn't go out there to get reactions to the take, just happened upon a thread.
I guess my biggest question with this is how do you parley this vote into a vehicle for radicalization? Wouldn't the media not cover the vote as much as they can and then give cover to those who do come under fire? Americans notoriously have a short attention span, so hoping this sticks until primary season seems optimistic.
I'm not saying the vote happening would be bad, more than it seems like a lot of energy expended within a corporate controlled system for very little gain. Open to having my mind changed.
I'm already listening to and reading a lot, not a ton of time to listen to an hour of discussion on this. If it can't be answered succinctly then I am just going to assume there isn't a good answer
They answer the exact questions you ask. It's up for pirating on /r/leftpodcasts.
how do you parley this vote into a vehicle for radicalization? Wouldn’t the media not cover the vote as much as they can and then give cover to those who do come under fire?
You want a simple answer to a question this large?
I'm assuming you have the correct answer? Please share. The media won't cover any progressive action positively.
Why would I be asking the question from the position of I think this is pointless if I saw a route to radicalization of others for it lol. Everyone rabid about doing this is saying
Step 1: Force the vote
Step 2: Count who doesn't vote for it
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Revolution
I have yet to see how the "ammunition" of someone voting no will do anything to improve material conditions
This debate has just shown how nihilistic and full of sad losers the left is.
Can't even fight for something to fight for it.
For the same reason it was important to vote in down ballot races during the election, nobody expects it to pass, it's about acquiring political ammunition so demsocs and left-adjacent candidates can win in local, state, and maybe even national races in 2022
Woudlnt this just allow for more democrats who wouldnt vote otherwise to vote for it and trick more people?
That would be too much of a risk for the neolibs, and it would piss off their donors, the votes will reflect the actual positions
And the dems aren't taking the senate anything before 2028 so its now or never, better for the left and Americans hurt by the pandemic to get pissed off it failed then nothing at all happening because of "whats the point" mentality
That would be too much of a risk for the neolibs, and it would piss off their donors, the votes will reflect the actual positions
Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Elizabeth Warren all cosponsored the Senate version of the bill, then backtracked later. If everyone knows it will lose, the votes aren't going to mean anything.
But couldn't every Dem in the house just vote for it knowing it would die in the Senate and even if it made it through there that it would be veto'd by Joe? Their donors surely understand hiding your true colors to retain power
Not trying to go after you here, but these are thoughts I've had about this issue
If the dems pass it by faking then good for us it's still passed, if after that they fail to take back the senate that's political ammunition for us, if Joe vetoes the bill that also political ammunition for us, on all potential angles the vote benefits us, how much it benefits is up to debate but there still a range of benefits which is why it's worth doing
Ultimately it seems like framing this all within electoral politics is rather pointless. It's ammunition for what? How is it actually going to change anything? By the time there are primaries this is a at best a distant blip in the memory of the electorate, and if you're organizing to radicalize people there are plenty of other issues much more impactful to speak about.
Sure it could do something, but the chances of that are incredibly low, to the point it doesn't feel worth the effort involved in getting it to happen.
If we want to talk electoral politics then the controversy should rest on Pelosi's Speaker of the House role and not that she'll get voted for if she lets a m4a vote fail in the house "so we can know who is bad"
The need for healthcare is never a "distant blip in the memory of the electorate" especially after covid and actually getting neolibs to vote against the bill without equivocating is useful for both radicalization and local and state races
It doesn't matter whether WE know which neolib is a fake or not on healthcare, the point is to get them to become open about it so that we can get hit them from the left and frankly it also doesn't matter whether the chances are low, you do it anyway, there is nothing else of worth going on
One's a vote that COULD change the lives of millions and the other is a name on a paper
A vote for a bill that can pass is for sure a higher commitment. The best case scenario of this bill is all the cosponsors plus a few more vote yes, and it won't pass if just a few Dems are against it as the majority is a slim one. Which is why I'm not considering it a higher commitment. Someone can vote yes now and then change their mind when they run for higher office
If anyone understands marketing and PR with faux caring it's large corporations
Fighting Pelosi has the same rules as medieval marital duels. AOC would have been buried up to her waist and armed with a club with her off hand tied behind her back. Pelosi would have been free to move about the ring, showering AOC with blows from 3lb stone inside a long sack.
How?
She's already lost her precious "committee" assignment, what has she got to loose?
Pelosi is deeply unpopular, and an obvious failures after the latest election. I still don't get why its "impossible" to fight Pelosi when she's this weak. Marc Pocan even admitted that Pelosi's only 4-5 votes away from loosing her speaker election. This seems like an obvious situation where "progressives" as a block should pressure Pelosi. But they won't do it.
Because you took me seriously I'm going to joke harder and faster than ever before. Good reply though. I agree with you completely.
