594
Wake-up Call: Democrats could easily lose the White House and Senate next year
(www.businessinsider.com)
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 20 Nov 2023
594 points (93.9% liked)
politics
18601 readers
3638 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.
- 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.
- 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I think they do: https://www.whitehouse.gov/therecord/
I just think the Dems suck at advertising it. Hell, I think Biden is trying for at least some student debt relief.
You aren't wrong, in a way. I'm nearing fifty and Biden is arguably the most progressive president in my lifetime. The problem is, that says more about the quality of presidents in my lifetime than it does about Biden, and with the climate crisis and encroaching global fascism, we don't have anymore time to wait. The Democrats are doing more, now, because pressure from the left has convinced them that they have to, but the leadership is still dragging their feet in defense of corporate profits as much as they can. The fact that they are doing more doesn't mean it's time to lower the pressure - it means the pressure is working, and we need to dial it up.
I don't really agree with you, but even if I did... "advertising it" is a big part of politics! It's called messaging, and it's important. You have to get people excited to vote for you. They need to feel like you're fighting for them. If you can't manage that, then don't blame people for not voting for you.
Yeah, but there's a couple things wrong. First, the Dems are trying to DO things, which is exceedingly difficult with a Republican Congress that can't even agree on a speaker.
But also, DOING things just doesn't get that much attention.
Fixing the threatening hyper-inflation after the PPP was pretty damn important, but they obviously can't advertise that because there are side effects. Our economy is returning to being based on real shit rather than make believe Venture Capital bullshit. That's a painful process, and of course the rich and corporations refuse to feel any of the pain (at least immediately). They're attempting to pawn all the pain off onto the working class, partly in the hope that they'll get more corporate tax cuts to "stimulate the economy".
They're getting more EVs made in America. The significant tax credit for EVs require that most of the car be made here.
They're fixing our crumbling bridges and roads. That doesn't get much attention, and if it does it'll be a part they've failed to address.
Amtrak is building out passenger rail lines that are actually relevant to me. It's not building metro systems in several medium US cities that need it, but it's a start.
You know a way that's much, much easier to get attention? Maybe the Dems should just pick a minority and spout fear and hate. That really plays much better with the public. Just put up a loud mouth who every other day spouts such incredibly dumb shit that the news HAS to cover it. That's a winning messaging strategy.
I can't afford an EV. I can't afford a house. I can't afford gas. I can't afford groceries. I can't afford health insurance-- actually, I can afford the minimum insurance I am required to purchase, but it is basically worthless. This is the kind of shit I don't hear/see much convincing from Democrats. Yes, fuck the fascists in the Republican party. Unfortunately, fascism can look like an 'answer' for these kind of problems. If we don't want people to fall for that trap, we need popular politics coming from the left.
What do you expect any president to do about that?
President specifically, nothing. Government and a political party as a whole? Fix the problem.
There's lots of ideas as to how to fix the problem, and though I have my own and have preferences, all that ultimately matters is that every single person in the country has a good place to live, food, and healthcare, and generally speaking, the ability to participate in society as much or as little as they choose.
Maybe voting for fewer Republicans would be a good start.
You want government to fix the problem of you making bad life choices?
...how?
That you don't understand that this is a ridiculously extreme ask is just unreal to me.
I was trying to encompass a lot of stuff in that phrasing, and I get the impression it came out very poorly.
My meaning is along the lines of including things like the ability to freely reach the necessary places for desired social engagement, access to whatever modern communication and interaction systems there are and so on, without limiting it to current technology or physical structure.
I didn't want to say 'a vehicle and internet' since those may not be necessary depending on other things. Even this explanation doesn't really cover it; there's a bunch of stuff in my head I want the government to be ensuring for us and it would take a huge essay to cover it all.
That's basically the opposite of what I thought you meant, which was that all of those things should be guaranteed and no one should have to work.
Good old written mediums
That is something that should be a goal, but it's an eventual goal, and not something I could reasonably ask of the government today.
I do want those things guaranteed today, but guaranteed in the sense that if someone must work a reasonable amount to obtain them, they can do so without difficulty.
I expect someone running for president to sound like they give a fuck about that, and (once elected) to use their position as the party leader to constantly marshal their forces towards real solutions to those problems.
Naive as hell, we get it.
They don't suck. They just don't get any help from corporate media or social media.
All corporate media is right wing media.
I also think people cling to the negatives. With student debt relief, everyone was cynical as hell at the time and still attacked the Dems.
Biden wiped the debt. Republicans filed a lawsuit and a Republican judge overturned the order.
Biden used the weakest legal reasoning he had available to cancel a fraction of existing student loan debt even though debt relief advocates were telling him not to. That made it easy to challenge in court.
Ya that one was on Biden. No idea why he chose that way to remove student loan debt.
Seems like maybe Obama shouldn't have made propaganda normal and mainstream
He's currently failing to handle the current most pressing international issue in a way that satisfies his voter base, though.
He is, don't think that contradicts anything I've said though. I'm just saying they do more than they let on.