589
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
589 points (88.9% liked)
politics
19198 readers
2468 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
We care a whole lot about not having another Trump presidency and unfortunately many here don't seem to have figured out how first past the post voting works yet.
We understand how it works perfectly fine, thanks. The Democrats just can't seem to get that if you constantly run on nothing but "Hey, the other guy is worse," while supporting unconscionable policies, failing to deliver on popular policies and being yet another in a long line of disappointments for significant parts of the population, eventually people will say "You know what? If you want to lose this bad, fine."
The Democrats will never actually change and improve if they keep managing to squeak by with more of the same. Unless they genuinely fear losing an election and take action to address it, we're going to be in the exact same position in another four years, complete with liberals screeching at everyone who doesn't fall in line, "Don't you understand, this is the end of democracy! The other guy will be so bad, and we promise not to suck this time, scout's honor."
During Clinton v Trump I was screeching about abortion rights. Oh well, right?
Sure would have been nice if Democrats did anything about the filibuster and passing legislation to codify abortion rights when they had majorities at the start of the Clinton and Obama presidencies, rather than just campaigning on the possibility of Republicans ramming through their anti-reproductive healthcare stances when they couldn't, and wringing their hands about bipartisanship when they did have chances, wouldn't it? Same sort of posturing and preening that we get on so many topics this election cycle that, even if Democrats get an overwhelming mandate in, they will proceed to do absolutely nothing to actually implement a permanent solution to so in 2028 they can cry wolf again. Remind me how the story of the little boy crying wolf ended, could you?
Sorry, what about the fact that real people lost their ability to get abortions is crying wolf? There was an actual fucking wolf just like I was crying.
The fuck? What do you think that story is teaching?
Yes, it would be nice if they had the majority required to enshrine abortion rights in law. But that wasn’t reality.
What was reality is enough Republicans in power believe it should be taken away.
So, just like this whole damn OP is about - while Dems aren’t what we actually want, they’re a whole lot fucking better than the alternative.
Well, there's the whole "Republicans are going to overturn Roe v Wade, vote for us so we'll protect your rights" bit they've been coasting on for 30 years that they did fuck all about the entire time. That's the crying wolf. They had chances to do so, and chose not to.
That's... Not what crying wolf is. That would be warning people that electing Trump would affect abortion rights and get them more SCOTUS seats and then that NOT happening. Except it's exactly what happened. We cried wolf and there was a wolf...
I think you're delusional if you think even Dems had the majority required to make that into law in the past 30 years.
You're being rather obtuse here, the Democrats have been crying wolf over Republican attempts to overturn Roe v Wade for decades and did nothing to prevent it, this isn't an issue that only popped up for Hilary's campaign in 2016. What a surprise that it actually gets through and done when people have already been desensitized to Dems saying "Watch out, they'll take away your right to an abortion, but if you vote for us, we'll protect it!" and nobody actually believes they'll do anything about it beyond say "Watch, the Republicans are coming for your right to abortion!" They could literally win every seat in the House and Senate, and they'd probably still sit on their hands so they could campaign on it again in a few years rather than settle the matter.
I gave you two examples within the last 30 years where they had the numbers to remove the filibuster and enact legislation. Those are just times when they had a sizeable enough margin, they could have passed the legislation in spite of idiots like Manchin and Lieberman.
Your continued misuse of the parable notwithstanding, I think you believe more Dems would have supported it than actually would have. Those chances go down the further back you go.
Dems are not a monolith.