In the words of filmmaker Michael Moore, who predicted Trump would win in 2016:
Liberals are like, What should we do about dinner? Umm, we could go out. Do you want to go out? Well, if you do. Okay, where should we go? I dunno, where do you wanna go?
Conservatives are like BAM! [slaps hand on table] Get in the car, we're goin' to the Sizzler!
And the Dems will help the GOP do it.
And Mexico will pay for it!
I always like to point out how there's art of these two characters fucking by the same author
You forgot the link
2800375 on furry msg site
Make love not war?
The Republican wishes he had this long trunk
This is the second time Donald Trump has been elected with full control of both the House and Senate. It is not surprising that an old man in the same scenario would behave the same.
The comic is mocking the democrats for spending the last 4 years pretending they were completely powerless, just like they did in the 4 years leading to Trump pt I. The US president is one of the most powerful executives.
Democrats so afraid of being wrong they don't even try to do what's right.
That's not their purpose, they just need to look the part. They are comfortable in the 'my hands are tied' position. They can propose bills they know will not make it. When they have a supermajority, like they had not long ago, they are in trouble. They have no choice but to stop proposing bills and find reasons to say they are 'sabotaged'. They played this game for centuries, still works.
They in this case being libs in liberal democracies, not democrats specifically.
One way to resolve the contradiction between the capitalist class, which the state represents, and the masses, whom the state requires to maintain power is for the masses to believe their representatives want what's best for them, but are powerless to implement it due to foreigners or nature or some other group, or are trying and it will happen some indeterminate time in the future.
They can propose bills they know will not make it.
they actively work to ensure don't make it. Manchin, Sinema and others like them are greatly valued by Dems for their role as scapegoats.
When they have a supermajority, like they had not long ago, they are in trouble.
The last true supermajority I'm aware of only lasted 72 days, back in 2009. It's when the Fair Pay act was signed, Affordable Care Act, and a few different attempts to reform Wall Street. They were certainly not as life-changing as I'd like, but I'm admittedly pretty far to the Left of the average US voter.
The even stronger supermajority before that was in 1965, and that got the creation of Medicare & Medicaid, the Voting Rights Act, Freedom of Info Act, etc.
The Dems are a weak centrist party, and the leadership is center-right at best, but even so - those two times where they had a supermajority in the Senate gave us some good to at least quasi-good stuff. I'm totally on board for bashing the Democrats, but it's hard to convey the amount of damage the truly undemocratic Senate has done over the decades, and I think we can't avoid the reality that there was a lot that got done in that brief period when the Republicans couldn't stop them. The ability to block legislation in the Senate is just incredible. Things just can't get passed, unless it's something the Republicans will agree to - so it's far easier for shitty stuff to get passed. Unfortunately, there are enough right wing democrats that will go along with the shitty stuff the Republicans propose, in no small part because their constituents actually like it. We're losing the propaganda war, because those with capital have far more power to wield.
So there's a lot of problems to fix - deeply undemocratic institutions like the Senate and the Electoral College, the entirety of the GOP, weakass right-wing Democrats, and the voters themselves. Unfortunately, yeah...the interests of Capital have intervened and made sure to cripple Education and control the media landscape, so to get back to my main point, since I'm losing the thread here - I'm agreed that the Democrats are shit, but we can't ignore reality that when they've had actual full control of the Federal government, things were at least going in a decent direction.
You misunderstand their incentives. They're beholden to the billionaires, not to you.
They're afraid of losing their jobs, though. If you can credibly threaten to primary them, they'll act.
They are not afraid of being wrong. They don't actually care about your well being, they are just here to make money for their corporate friends and themselves.
More like too much interest in rules
I mean, I was super curious what Sanders could've done if he had the chance. Instead, we got the opposite experiment.
If democrats in the US vote for stuff like Biden, then they're not voting for any radical change. Trump isn't comparable to that.
I still remember the full-on panic mode people were in when it looked like Bernie might clinch the nomination in 2020. So absurd, but that's what happens when the ruling class is afraid that they might have to pay higher taxes.
Americans voted for Biden because the primary system heavily favored Biden and Americans were told Biden was "more electable" than Bernie, even though every one of Bernie's policies and his messaging polled better.
If the DNC didn't put their thumbs on the scale, Bernie would have won in 2016 (or 2020), and guaranteed a democratic victory in the next election because nobody receiving free healthcare is going to vote to go back to the current system.
Bernie isn't radical, he's a social democrat, he just looks radical because the democrats are right of George W Bush right now.
I get it and I don't disagree, but- Well, I for one wouldn't mind some radical change. Just not in the direction that it is going right now. Radical in itself is nothing bad, when the status quo is as bad as it is.
If democrats in the US vote for stuff like Biden, then they’re not voting for any radical change
I don't exactly know the details, but weren't there accusations of meddling from the DNC that stoppered Sanders' chance of securing the nomination, and a belief among some that he might have won the nomination if it had been a free and fair primary process?
In other words, it's possible (though by no means certain) that your sentence above works if "democrats" means "the DNC and the establishment of the Democratic Party", but not if it means "people who by-and-large support the Democratic Party".
The Dems did some delegate fuckery where all candidates endorsed Biden because
BernieTrump had to be stopped at all cost, and their delegates went to Biden even if he hadn't been voted for. Kamala contributed all of her 0 delegates and got VP for beinga copthe first to drop out iirc.
I mean, I was super curious what Sanders could’ve done if he had the chance.
There is a lot of speculation that Sanders would have faced enormous opposition both from the "centrist" media and conservatives within his own party, such that he was hobbled for his full four years. But the expectation is predicated on Sanders playing by Clinton/Obama rules, where you float a progressive idea and Congress says "NO!" and then throw up your hands and spend the back half of your term glad-handing dictators to sell F-35s.
I don't think Sanders would have the Trump/DOGE enthusiasm for shredding the norms and imposing radical reform at the executive level. But if this Presidency is any indication, all you really need is a ketamine fueled cartel of techbros, a stack of EO stationary, and a fresh sharpie. And you can fully remake the federal bureaucracy from root to branch.
If democrats in the US vote for stuff like Biden, then they’re not voting for any radical change.
Biden made a very conscious decision to run to the left of Bernie in 2020. He avoided Clinton's fumbles through the Midwest in large part by echoing all the Obama '08 and Sanders '16 pledges, while the national media amplified his electoral platform in the middle of a COVID-induced campaign freeze.
American Dems are just as vulnerable to a coordinated propaganda campaign as their conservative and libertarian peers. So its no surprise people who'd fallen for the corporate sponsored faux-populist schtick in elections prior would fall for it this time around. But there was also a very deep and not unjustified fear among moderate Dems that running anyone but Biden would guarantee the kind of news cycle smear campaigns against Sanders that brought down Hillary.
The failure of the American liberal movement is largely rooted in their lack of faith in their own base and their own message. Liberals have convinced themselves that every year is 1972 and every progressive is going to lose like McGovern did. They've bought fully into the Republican propaganda machine and only ever know how to fight on the Republicans' terms. And, as a result, guys like Reagan and Bush and Trump can stake out turf to the left of Democrats, win on narrow margins, and then govern uncontested as fascists.
Still nothing
Courts wouldn’t even let Biden offer student loan relief
Probably, but I'd only believe that there is really nothing to be done once I see someone actually left-leaning attempt everything in their toolbox.
I believe Sanders would have tried to change as much as possible in the US. I also believe that he would have failed regarding a lot of things. Would have really liked to see him try though.
Really though, beyond the Dems doing something legislatively, could you imagine if the party actually utilized it's network for direct action campaigns. Not that their donors or upper middle class members would be copacetic to any actual economic disruption. I mean christ, the Senate leader doesn't even want to let the Republicans shut down the government while they're busy dismantling it. Their current strategy is to appeal by saying they can bring back business as usual. Unfortunately they don't seem to understand that appearing ineffectual turns centrists off even more than appearing radical does.
Unfortunately they don’t seem to understand that appearing ineffectual turns centrists off even more than appearing radical does.
Does it though?
Look at how much .world or reddit downvote and deride posts critical of Democrat behavior since the beginning on the election and the only takeaway you can get is that they're in onboard with it no matter how much they hate it simply because Republicans are worse.
Look at how much .world or reddit downvote and deride posts critical of Democrat behavior since the beginning on the election
Agreed, but why should we still presume that upvotes reflect genuine user opinion as opposed to astroturfing?
It seems that lib-aligned groups use Reddit to manufacture approval for their clients. Given this, why should we view Reddit as a credible window into popular opinion? The entire site is an infomercial at this point
They're on board because the party moved to the right for them.
"You have to understand there's only so much I can do in this position"
Meanwhile, one of their former members named Huey Long: "Now I dynamite 'em out of my path"
Yall been taking the bait for years. Dems succeed on your fears. Why would they eliminate them?
What a bizarrely stupid take.
Have you been paying attention? Like, at all? They fundraise on that shit.
Yes, Democrats are bizarre and stupid so any take inspired by them is precisely that; but it needs to be said for the fools who agree w them to serve as a mirror.
It's almost as if there's a pressure on one, but not on the other.
ChEcKs AnD bAlAnCeS
