republicans: we will shit on the working class
tankies: omg, dems so bad
Reps: we will crap on the working class
Dems: we will crap on the working class ✨
Leftists: The Dems don’t actually help the working class, both parties derive their power and legitimacy from their donors, wealthy Capitalists. They function as businesses that sell policy to the highest bidder. We need a revolution in order for the people to have a real say.
Liberals: Shut up, tankie!
“Every nation gets the government it deserves.”
Republicans are garbager and yet…
You work within the system until you can get the change you want. By throwing your hands up you…ugh why even bother.
If you can’t get necessary change by working within the system then you must work outside it and replace it.
Company that installs Overton windows said to be leaving then on moving dolly, left mumbling something about install it yourself morons.
Perhaps you can shake your fist angrily. I assume a sternly worded letter or phone call would be too much effort.
They all fuck us. Doesn’t matter what color tie they wear.
Ha ha #bothSides . still?!?
yes… both sides fuck us over for the benefit of theirs ruling/owner class.
This is why you don’t base your political opinions on memes
That’s a great take if you completely ignore that laws are written by congress, and in the last 30 years Democrats have only had both chambers and the executive, by a slim margin for 2 years and a wide margin for 2 years. In those 2 years of a wide margin (Obama) they passed the ACA, which was watered down by republicans because it was the only way to get it to pass because they still didn’t have a super majority.
The Democrats have utterly failed to appeal to workers, and as such fail to bring out the votes. The DNC is a business that sells policy to wealthy Capitalists, it doesn’t represent the working class.
That’s a very true statement. I expect reams of downvotes.
Probably not, since we are on Lemmy.ml and not Lemmy.world, though I’m sure a few will be upset.
The Democrats have utterly failed to appeal to workers, and as such fail to bring out the votes. The DNC is a business that sells policy to wealthy Capitalists, it doesn’t represent the working class.
Huh? Did you actually follow the election at all. Trump’s solution for the working class was “I’ll get you better jobs with more pay” and when asked for specific examples, he couldn’t provide anything of substance. But he was fond of talking about how he hated unions and paying overtime during his speeches and talking about killing the ACA. VERY pro worker.
On the flip side Kamala was offering up cutting taxes on the middle class, lowering food prices, expanding the ACA, assistance to first time home buyers, and more assistance around childcare.
I don’t know exactly what you think “appeals to workers” but she checked literally every box beyond promising “more pay” without any semblance of a way to do so. Is your idea of “appealing to workers”: you just need to lie more?
You’re talking about Kamala “means testing” Harris, who paraded around with Liz Cheney, and comparing it to Trump who ran a far-right populist campaign running on ideas like “no tax on tips.” Harris failed to run on popular programs like Medicare for All, and Trump did his usual awful schtick while exploiting the fact that Harris had no solid policy.
Neither party represents the workers, they both sell policy to wealthy Capitalists, and that’s it.
Everything you listed helps the ~10% of Americans that are still middle class, not the working class. Except lowering food prices which we know she’s not even attempt since it would require backstabbing her campaign financiers.
No working class person has delusions of owning a home at this point, that’s a pipe dream only the deranged and rich could ever hope for. The ACA is a failure that most people can’t afford, we need healthcare reform in totality. Everything you listed sounds like giving money to the rich so peasants can afford the Rich’s services.
Forgot to put the portion where Reps try and block every single fucking thing that Dems try to accomplish.
Wanna know why abortion wasn’t enshrined into law when the Dems had the majority? Because they didn’t have a filibuster proof super majority for the handful of weeks they had all the power.
We got the ACA instead.
They had the super majority at the start of that term. They couldn’t have pushed something as complicated as the ACA through, but they could have moved on something small like affirming Roe. Besides, the Republicans always find a way to ram through legislation without a super majority (and I’d suspect we’re about to see them abolish it entirely), but the Democrats never do.
For example, when the Senate parliamentarian tells the Democrats that they can’t pass a $15 minimum wage through a simple majority, the Democrats give up. When the parliamentarian tells the Republicans they can’t do something, they ignore them, and one time, they just flat our fired the guy.
You can argue about whether the Republicans are being unethical or underhanded, but at the end of the day, they achieve things, and the Democrats don’t. The Democrats will tell you that they need 60 votes to do anything and that the parliamentarian won’t allow them to pass non-budgetary items without one, but Senate filibuster rules can be changed, and the Parliamentarian has no real authority. Playing by the rules while your opponent cheats isn’t noble, it’s stupid.
The super majority at the start was those 4 weeks when Dems had any potential. When you get a time machine, go back and tell them to do Roe instead. Don’t listen when they absolutely disbelieve Roe is at risk. We all thought Roe was safe back then.
No, we didn’t. No one in the last 50 years thought roe was safe. Every single dem presidential candidate in that time campaigned on codifying roe.
There’s also just a massive element of the Democrats no longer functioning as a coherent political unit. It wouldn’t help in an instance needing a filibuster-proof majority, but since being a Democrat is mostly negatively defined as “We’re not the Republicans” these days, it has grown to encompass a range of views that prevents them from having a cohesive platform backed by all members in the way the GOP largely operates today.
Yes, Republican obstructionism is a major element in the dysfunction of our government at the moment, but even before you run into that, you have a party that embraces the Joe Manchins, Kyrsten Sinemas and Joe Liebermanns of US politics, while also having your Bernie Sanders and AOCs. Even before you encounter the obstructionist tendencies of Republicans, you have Democrats who don’t fall in line that can hold the party platform hostage, and no meaningful mechanisms to force them to do so.
The Democratic Party really needs to start defining itself positively, rather than the current “We’re not the other guy, so at least we aren’t so bad” stance, and presenting a unified front in the face of Republican obstinance. There should be a time a place for intellectual debate, but the Democratic status quo not only makes them look incompetent when they can’t hold members to task for failing to support major elements of the party platform (see Manchin’s stranglehold over Biden’s agenda that left quite a bit dead on arrival prior to Republican efforts), it also demotivates would-be voters.
Also forget the portion where dems do not use their powers unless it is needed for Israel.
I’m not buying this anymore. Dems could do the same if they had balls. Enough of this when they go low we go high bs.
Here, have an actual teacher - who goes to insane lengths to find shit (including the fact that many Dems were quite conservative)- explain:
And thanks to non voters you will never have a chance to get a better candidate since now free elections in america are a thing of the past. Congrats. Because you do your “both sides” garbage you destroyed any hope of improvement.
American elections were never free, and the fact that the Harris campaign failed to bring out voters is the fault of the Democrats, not the voters.
Either way, revolution was always required to actually get meaningful change.
I don’t understand this.
Voting is easy and a basic civic duty we are taught about in middle school, in pretty much every state, you have weeks to do it, can drop off in mail boxes, ballot boxes, in person, early, etc.
Presidential elections only happen every four years, and there are going to be very very few people who would not be aware that it’s happening well in advance.
Not voting is just plain lazy, that’s all. It’s a responsibility that takes very little effort to do, there are multiple avenues provided to do it and you only have to do it two or three times a decade.
No one is forcing me to take a shower every morning or brush my teeth, or go to work everyday, but I do it because it’s important, and my overall health and life is affected by it.
Voting is very deliberately made highly inconvenient depending on zip code, and additionally the parties are not different enough for many people to care. You get these people to vote by making it more convenient and quick, and promising popular policies like Medicare for All.
How come rural, under educated voters are able to make it out every election without problems.
I’m not going to defend people failing to do a simple task once every four years.
You have four years to prepare for the event. And there are only two states that don’t offer early voting, and those states allow absentee ballots for people who won’t be home, have disabilities, or would otherwise struggle to vote in person. We have more resources available than ever, it’s easier than ever to vote, generally, thanks to widespread mail in voting adoption (which was demonstrated by a 6% higher turnout in 2020)
I am sure you can find excuses for people here and there who were really truly unable, but 90 million eligible voters failed to do their civic duty. Even assuming every single homeless person was unable to vote, which is unlikely, that’s still 88.5 million that didn’t show up, and let’s take EVERY single person with a disability and assume they somehow couldn’t vote, that’s still 45 million people that didn’t show up. And let’s take EVERY single person under the poverty and assume they were unable to vote, then let’s assume there is absolutely zero overlap, you still have 10+ million people who didn’t show up, and that’s assuming not a single of the above people voted.
Failing to prepare for something doesn’t excuse you from the failure of doing it.
I hope you understand you reek of privledge with the way you talk. Rural voters have an easier time of voting, typically, because of the lower population density. In fact, urban areas are often intentionally short-staffed.
At the end of the day, people vote if they feel like it makes a difference. The fact of the matter is that it largely doesn’t outside of swing states, and even in swing states the differences between the two candidates was not as high as it was in 2020, when Biden at least pretended to be progressive.
You have to take a real, systemic analysis and stop blaming individuals for broader societal problems.
Voting isn’t a civic duty when your votes are meaningless.
Now make one with an elephant in the middle to put next to this one. It will be equally trite.
False. The one with the elephant in the middle accomplishes things. Terrible things. I’ll take do-nothing over do-wrong
Yeah it’s a promise of $20 that never comes vs a punch to the face
GOP gives their base red meat. This is because it is compatible with their donors’ interests. This contrasts to Dems, for whom delivering for their base runs counter to their donors’ interests.
What is deliverrd by the GOP is marginalization, of course, but this is still a more direct and materiap response than what the Dems do, which is just PR.
Yeah it will be, because that’s how the corporate-run political duopoly works.
It’s a big club and you ain’t in it [1][2]
