this post was submitted on 26 May 2025
23 points (76.7% liked)
United States | News & Politics
8045 readers
583 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes, the Democratic Party has to move away from the left, otherwise their views are out of touch with most Americans. Jason Crow might be a good Democratic Presidential candidate.
The DNC is a far-right party, they need to move towards the left if they want to pick up votes.
If the DNC is far right, what is the GOP?
A bit farther to the right. Ths US Empire is far-right.
You are delusional
It’s a burner astroturfing account. But the Dem bots are just like the party. Won’t learn anything, and will just post the same shit in two weeks with a different face.
This is not a reasonable take. The Democrats doubled-down hard on ~~conservatism~~ centrism in 2024 and all it did was help Trump broaden his coalition. Also here, in Missouri, Republicans not only won, they won against the backdrop of voters approving a $15 minimum wage, required paid sick leave, and voting down an abortion ban.
Bernie and AOC are filling football stadiums in red states with their speeches. If the Dems want to win, they'll embrace economic populism and the left.
Simply put, your opinion is wrong. But feel free to trot out the Cheneys again for all the good it'll do you.
Biden had an open border policy and Harris foolishly said that she wouldn't have done anything differently than Biden despite polls showing that Americans wanted more border security. Harris would have been smart to do want Merz of Germany did; adopt a tough immigration policy in order to undermine the appeal of the AFD.
You've inadvertently stumbled upon exactly the reason democrats have nothing to gain moving right: because Biden had a very strict border policy, but it didn't matter because Republicans just accuse him of having an "open border policy" anyway, and right wingers like yourself believe them.
Biden did not have a strict border policy. Governor Abbott of Texas was busing illegal migrants to sanctuary cities where they were straining the resources of those cities.
See? Even though Biden had a very strict border policy, you assume he didn't because Republicans said so.
Your take is so bad, you're getting dunked on by .world users
Biden deported 250% more people than Trump.
Biden later began to realize that Americans did not want a flood of migrants, but the damage had been done. Of course, if more illegal migrants are allowed in more would be deported.
Bullshit. You’re pulling those numbers out of your ass.
Now, I'm no Biden fan, but this take is also unreasonable.
Biden had an immigration bill. Senate Republicans refused to pass it and offered no alternatives.
The immigration narrative was built on deliberate obstruction.
It was also a terrible bill that capitulated to right-wing framing on immigration.
More Americans support Mass Legalization of immigrants over Mass Deportation, despite the lack of rhetoric on that from the Democratic party.
Be that as it may, it runs contrary to the 'open border policy' argument.
I criticize Dems often because they tend to say they support something then do nothing to make their promises a reality when they have power, but this is an instance where Democrats made a legitimate effort toward creating change in immigration policy, and it didn't happen because of Republicans who themselves have no policies other than doing nothing and letting things get worse.
True, I fucking wish they went with an open border policy
Why is that?
(Not saying this to be sarcastic, genuinely curious about your POV.)
Because there isn't any legitimate reason to turn away people seeking asylum or looking to immigrate. The issue with the process we have how intentionally slow and throttled it is. We can easily speed up the legalization process. Illegal immigration happens either from desperation or, most commonly, overstayed visas. Instead of treating this as a criminal act, we can simply have them begin the legalization process while staying in the country.
Even from an economic perspective immigrants are a benefit. However our intentional two-tier labor system is utilized by companies to hyperexploit illegal immigrants by threat of deportation. Legalization is critical to also institute labor protections. Along with unionization, this would also benefit American workers in those same industries with increased pay and benefits. Companies like to use the two-tier labor system to also justify lowering wages for the legal workers.
You make some good points, thank you.
I tend to err on the side of the argument you're on. I think we should have a far more robust visa system and path to citizenship, largely because we benefit from immigrants' work to such a significant extent.
I don't think it'll ever happen though, for the same reason that we'll never see legalized abortion in this country. Some issues are just way too easy for a political party to monetize. (And it's legal for politicians to loan their campaigns money at 20% interest and then pocket those donations.)
There is an argument to be made for immigration disrupting the culture of border cities, but I think that's more of an issue with illegal immigration as opposed to legal immigration, so to me, that's just more fodder for the argument that we should have a more accessible path to citizenship.
We need a party that serves the working class before a lot of these issues are able to gain traction. Unfortunately the vast majority of politicians are captured by corporate interests, and our system is designed to reward such.
I don't think there is a good argument to be made for that honesty, the vast majority of people who think of immigrants as 'disrupting culture' seem to simply dislike diversity when you try to dig down at what exactly is being disrupted. I honestly think that's more of an education issue. Where the expansion of public education, including college, would help the most. Especially with the legalization aspect you mentioned. Legalized immigrants would have their educational opportunities far improved, and it would also improve integration. Ultimately, integration is a generational thing, but public education can definitely improve it for everyone
Republicans in the House rejected the bipartisan immigration bill at the urging of Trump, but Biden was told by Republicans that he could stop illegal migrants using executive order, but Biden refused.
No he didn't, quit making shit up
If you think the Democratic party is "left," I'd like you to pass that doobie over here so I can get high, too.
I don't even smoke anymore and I want it, too.
I'll take two tokes... and also one for you.
Why do you think the Democratic Party is unpopular?
They think they are the only people who should resist the republicans, and they most certainly act like it to. A very heavy "what are ya gonna do, vote republicans?" vibe pours put of every orifice of the party and their members.
All while simultaneously preventing and not pursuing reforms that would allow for multiple political parties to exist without a spoiler effect.
That isn't democracy, that is a hostage situation. And I for one will never fall for the Stockholm syndrome that has claimed so very many of my fellow countrymen. Yall think you are woke, but you are repeatedly being injected with tranquilizers and kept thinking in the world's tiniest box.
Not to mention the "most electable" and "most adult" people in the political process has been defeated repeatedly by a fucking clown show, and their repeated refusal to apply the laws of the land to their republican friends.
Also the war on drugs is a bipartisan war against the citizens of this country.
There is more but I get the feeling you're not really interested in what I think or say.
Actually, there are other parties in the US. There is the Green Party and the Libertarian Party. Some drugs such as fentanyl are deadly if misused.
Are you trolling? Technically there exist other parties, but USian election rules (especially FPTP) are mathematically proven to cause such a huge spoiler effect that, even when a big fraction of voters hate both viable parties, electing a single third-party congressman is very unlikely, and electing a third-party president is nearly impossible.
It is like saying that the Earth is not round, because, strictly speaking, it is slightly bulged.
Why vote for reactionaries that pretend not to be reactionaries? If you're a reactionary, you'll vote for the openly reactionaries, and if you're not, you'll vote for neither.
For precisely the opposite reason you are suggesting. They do not listen to what people want. They are out of touch and capitulate to the Republicans.
Most people don't want more corporate affiliation. Most people want food, healthcare, housing, education, and a living wage so they don't exist as slaves to their company.
All of those things are positions the GOP work actively against. The Dems currently do not act effectively to PROTECT those things. That's why they're unpopular.
Most people want food, healthcare, education, and housing but not to the extent of the left. It would require very high taxes to pay for them. A high minimum wage doesn't work. . California passed a $20.00/hr. minimum wage law for fast food workers. The result was that employers hired less workers.
OK, smart guy, how do you propose we pay for these things if not with taxes. Right now, our taxes go to wars we don't believe in. The Pentagon has failed its audits for years, misplacing billions and there's no accountability. Politicians get to take advantage of gold standard Healthcare, but deny us a public option.
We subsidize bullshit, our cost of living goes up, our wages stay stagnant, our food becomes more expensive, and affluent white dickheads in charge stay in charge.
You propose keeping things the same, or at least you believe that's what people want. We've been getting fleeced for years. Should we just hold out a little longer?
The only people who speak like you are comfortable. You're the minority.
Taxes are necessary but if they are too high it lessens the motivation to work. The purpose of working hard is to make money not give it away. If Russia conquers Ukraine, it will lead to more defense spending as the threat from Russia would increase. Giving the Sudetenland to Hitler didn't appease him.
False. China has lower inequality and simultaneously far greater economic growth and more innovation.
And Putin is bad, but not remotely as harmful to world peace as the US regime. The US (both parties) has been involved in literally 200 military interventions just in the last few decades.
Democracy is not when a black woman is chosen as the Nurembeg-deserving war criminal in chief.