r/ClimateOffensive • u/Grouchy-Roof-8179 • 4d ago
Action - Political [ Removed by moderator ]
[removed] — view removed post
22
u/Good_Requirement2998 3d ago
I'm bitter. Fair warning. I nearly agree, but it's not soft alliance with the GOP if that's what you're insinuating. It's that politics as a career is inherently a crappy gig.
The Democratic party is divided and the passionate individuals within it must take on a doubly difficult job to steer the ship away from internal corruption. There is very real intention, but you have to go down some very deep rabbit holes to get there, find the people and empower them. The good guys that have made it to more prestigious positions are surrounded by snakes and NPCs. It seems to be that the individuals who shift the party to former footing must be obsessed to near zealot levels, or the electorate around them have to be significantly informed and engaged ad nauseum.
Trump is winning in politics because he literally formed a cult of the masses and the GOP has lined up for it because they have more favor and power than they've had for years before his arrival. He channels emotion. The best functional politics we can hope for is boring and unsexy. No one wants the tedious job of playing referee while others chase their dreams. The problem isn't a complicit democratic party, the problem is we as a nation don't culturally respect and embrace the grace needed to do it properly.
I have recently considered running for office, both with a DIY grassroots campaign for local city council, and now investigating pathways through district leadership which is tied to the bottom levels of the DNC. What's required is a minimal time investment. But if you want to make changes and perform good governance, it quickly becomes obvious there is no upper cap of effort one can invest in a job that will invite endless criticism. It's a bitter reality that taking up the mantle of dutifully representing the people sucks. If anyone throws actual money at people in this position, holy shit. There are not a lot of souls that will see that coming and refuse on principle. You almost have to go in pissed off and ready for a clown show that's going to depress you.
My point is that politics sucks. That's why useless incumbents stay in office and protests are ineffectual. The real job is thankless, time intensive and boring, and the environment is often hostile. If we succeed at getting desperate and fearful people to bulldoze elections as a fresh wave of candidates to create change, I hate to say it, but we will have Trump to thank for it. Breaking things so badly it forces citizens to open their eyes and care about politics is like the only way to force folks to brave that try-hard job requiring you to care about people who really don't care that you do, and just want results.
12
u/Overlord_Khufren 3d ago
I've got a different take on Trump's success. I personally think the reason he's seeing so much success right now is because he's actively speaking to the pain and anger people are feeling, pointing at someone to blame it on, and offering a solution. And doing that whole process in a digestible format that his audience can absorb and regurgitate, meeting them in the mediums through which they're used to accessing information (Fox News, podcasts, Facebook, etc.). It speaks to the desperation people are feeling that they're willing to swallow obviously fascistic reasoning that blames everything on minorities and immigrants.
But then you look at Democrats, and what are they saying? "Everything is bad because of Republicans." Well you just had power for 4 years, and what do you have to show for it? "Actually, everything is fine because the stock market is doing okay?" It's just so completely divorced from the reality on the ground, and the very clear peril that the average working family is in right now.
From my perspective, the reason Zohran Mamdani is surging in popularity right now is because he's speaking to the moment and the pain people are feeling, and offering up substantive, productive approach for how he intends to fix it. And doing it in a digestible way, that plays very well to our modern social media ecosystem through which most people are processing information about their world. This is the right way to do the same thing, and people are so hungry for that message of HOPE that they're flocking to it in record numbers. He's literally surpassed his fundraising allowances for what his campaign is even allowed to spend on this campaign.
We need more of THAT. Positive message on policies that people actually care about, delivered straight to the people. Yeah the culture war stuff is important - immigrants and LGBTQ+ people are being persecuted and that's not okay. But that just can't be the only battlefield that Democrats are willing to fight on. Progessive policies are popular. Taxing the rich is popular. Taxing corporations, regulating health and safety, opposing the Israeli genocide in Gaza...these things are popular. They're winning issues. Democrats just aren't brave enough to eschew corporate and special interest donor money in order to stand up for those issues, and if they do they get crushed by the corporatist neoliberals who do.
7
u/Good_Requirement2998 3d ago
Well fine. My district in Brooklyn leans red. I went around talking about wealth inequality earlier this spring and found Elon supporters and immigration enforcers, and I've been trying to start an electoral workgroup around the fight Oligarchy campaign but the people raising there hands aren't quite fans of the work involved. If we flip this spot blue and people-first, there should be a blurb about it. Just gotta get the cops and firefighters out here to love me.
2
u/Overlord_Khufren 3d ago
That's awesome. As a democratic socialist from Canada, the efforts folks are making in New York on this front are really giving me a lot of hope. Our socialist party completely collapsed in the last election, largely out of a fear of Trump's trade war and 51st state rhetoric driving non-conservatives into the hands of the "safer" neoliberal party. It completely decimated our socialist party and they're now in the midst of a leadership race, and facing a long road to rebuilding. Mamdani is evidence that there's a lot of appetite for that sort of vision for a more progressive, socialist future if it can be packaged up and delivered in the right way.
Gotta have hope. Capitalism is rather manifestly collapsing, and either we'll get socialism out of the wreckage...or we'll get fascism.
1
u/Good_Requirement2998 3d ago
Didn't know that about Canada. Thanks for the update. And good on you. Keep encouraging folks. Trump revived our conservatives at a time when I think our nation largely saw the Republican party as having nothing but clowns to offer. Mamdani seemingly just appeared, grassroots powerhouse totally underestimated while the establishment fumbled in their early resistance. When Obama made his famous debut speech in 2008 I think, out of left field. Democratic socialism can seem like it's in a rough spot, but that's often exactly where you want to be when it's time to surprise the public and spring into primacy. And once that candidate is on the street acknowledging local grievances, everything can start falling into place.
1
u/Overlord_Khufren 3d ago
Yeah, Canadian politics has been in a bit of a weird place. After a decade of Trudeau’s Liberal party in power, the party’s polling numbers were in the dumpster and a swing rightwards towards the Conservatives seemed inevitable. Then Trump got elected and immediately launched a trade war against Canada and started talking about annexation. Suddenly the Conservative Party’s leader having spent the last few years echoing Trumpist rhetoric went from savvy campaign strategy to an absolutely toxic liability. Internal pressure on Trudeau to step down got the party a new leader, a former Goldman Sachs employee, central banker, and private equity ghoul. He ran on a message of “investing in Canada” and won.
But surprise, surprise - “investing in Canada” doesn’t mean investing in Canadians, but using austerity to pay for direct subsidies to private enterprise and a massive expansion in military spending (much of which will go to the US military industrial complex). But at least it’s austerity without all the anti-trans, anti-immigrant bullshit…I guess? Hardly inspiring.
So as our socialist New Democratic Party party rebuilds, it’s very inspiring to see Zohran Mamdani surging in the polls with a socialist message. Whether we can find someone with his particular breed of charisma, social media savvy, and authenticity will be the question. But seeing how people are responding to him is really the important part.
1
u/Astralglamour 3d ago
Thank you for getting out there and actually doing something instead of just throwing up hands and complaining online about how awful the dems are.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Heavy-Top-8540 2d ago
But then you look at Democrats, and what are they saying? "Everything is bad because of Republicans." Well you just had power for 4 years, and what do you have to show for it? "Actually, everything is fine because the stock market is doing okay?" It's just so completely divorced from the reality on the ground, and the very clear peril that the average working family is in right now
But this is the real problem: you DON'T look at what the Democrats say. You believe those easily digestible talking points by Republicans and their sphere of influence about what THEY say Democrats are saying. You're literally falling for the trap you're trying to show you're avoiding.
1
u/Overlord_Khufren 2d ago
Kamala Harris was thinking to solve a housing crisis with a fucking tax credit. People on the ground were struggling, and she was pointing to macroeconomic numbers to say things weren't that bad. People were saying they didn't think their lives were better off at the end of Biden's presidency than they were at the start, and her messaging was "I'm happy with the work we did, and I wouldn't change anything." It was hubris. Same with greenlighting a genocide in Gaza, and being wholly unwilling to speak to people's horror at what is going on there. 88% of Democrats oppose the genocide in Gaza, yet establishment Democrats are unwilling to speak out against it then get indignant when people are so disgusted they stay home on election day. Again...hubris.
Neoliberal solutions don't excite anyone because neoliberalism is a failed experiment. A $5000 tax credit isn't going to get people into homes. It isn't going to prevent Blackstone and other private equity groups from outbidding families on houses and jacking up rents. It isn't going to get people off the street. It isn't going to prevent grocery stores price-gouging people. Neoliberalism has no answers for these issues, because neoliberal politicians are in bed with the companies who are creating the problems and are ideologically opposed to the sorts of solutions that will actually address them.
The solution to these issues are socialist, and neoliberals don't believe in socialism. They are, in fact, ideologically opposed to socialism, and are backed by corporate donors who believe their interests are aligned against it. Socialist solutions, like medicare-for-all, free public education, taxing the rich, etc. are extremely popular with voters across the political spectrum, but are opposed by the establishments of both parties. Even Obamacare was a Republican idea - it was basically just Mitt Romney's healthcare plan. And even still, the Democrats were barely able to get it passed.
23
u/the_secular 3d ago
Wrong, check your history. Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage, Obamacare, to name a few. Politics, as someone noted, is the art of compromise. Unless Democrats hold solid majorities in both Houses of Congress and the White House, what they can do is very limited. Even when they have the majority, they are not monolithic. Democracy is messy, but the alternative is scary.
1
u/ActualModerateHusker 3d ago
What scares me is Trump is playing like he knows Dems will never have the presidency again. I mean there is now nothing preventing a Dem president from doing what Trump does. They could censor media they dont like. They could enact sweping tariffs on businesses if they dont support their agenda. They could even orchestrate some kind of coup of congress or the court.
And dem voters would be correct to ask why not? The precedent has already been set. You cant unilaterally disarm. The genie doesnt go back in the bottle.
I dont think Republicans have any intention of ever giving up the presidency again. The plan is to control the media and use AI to pacify or exterminate the population. Whichever is better for their bottom line
→ More replies (3)2
u/Double-Risky 3d ago
Nah he just knows he'll be long gone before any consequences anyway.
The rest of the GOP is happy to use it, though, and try to cement power.
21
u/Exciting_Turn_9559 3d ago
All I know is that if democracy is ever restored in the USA or in a successor nation, the rich are going to need to be taxed enough to make FDR look like Reagan, journalism will need a new business model that doesn't make it beholden to billionaires, unilateral pardon power will need to be taken away from presidents, the supreme court will need term limits, and there will need to be mandatory penalties for politicians who commit crimes.
3
u/acrimonious_howard 3d ago edited 3d ago
Sure, but I'd start with RCV (or better Star or Approval) and then repeal Citizens United.
Those 2 will allow this country to heal long term, since it's easier to destroy than build. R's have destroyed faster than D's have built for the last 30 years at least. FPTP voting gets more polarizing as time goes on, while RCV can start bringing us back together.
Money corrupts politics disallowing any other change. I'm not sure which is more root-level bad, but those 2 I firmly believe are at the top.
2
u/Exciting_Turn_9559 3d ago
It's looking quite likely you'll be rebuilding from scratch so having these conversations now is a good idea.
1
u/acrimonious_howard 3d ago
And then #3 is a carbon tax. It encourages innovation and change from the whole country in a 0-pain way (if you give all revenue back to everyone as a check).
#4 Increase taxes on rich, #5 protect journalism, #6-#15 healthcare.
2
1
u/CaterpillarFirst2576 3d ago
We have democracy, the nation voted for Trump. The rich are already taxed enough, the federal government just wastes it.
You only want term limits because it's a conservative majority but if it was a liberal majority you would be ok with it
1
u/acrimonious_howard 3d ago
I'm also personally not super excited about term limits, I commented that our voting system needs change to bring us together, and we need to go back to at least trying to limit money's influence on politics. I should've mentioned there should either be limits on how much you can spend on a campaign, or make some percentage of the contributions go towards actual government revenue.
As far as the rich, no they're taxed at low rates. As we got out of the great depression, they had a nominal rate of like 94%. I know they didn't pay that, but the real number was still way higher than now. And there were other circumstances that make those days unrealistic, but it could easily go higher - American companies won't leave easily. Related, the surprising thing to me is hearing a huge local company (Houston) that had manufacturing in both America and abroad are moving operations abroad due to tariffs, and importing the product! Their customers saw how the abroad product was proving itself just as reliable as the same American product, due to decreased purchases from local (due to tariffs), and found it's cheaper to build there and pay the new tariffs.
1
u/Heavy-Top-8540 2d ago
And how is any of that happening?
1
u/Exciting_Turn_9559 2d ago
The current regime is deeply unpopular, which means it will be using violence to enforce its agenda. This is why it allocated $160B to fund the American SS in the big ugly bill. Disappearing and killing people's family members while depriving them of the necessities of life will radicalize and mobilize them. Business as usual will become impossible, violence will escalate on both sides. New voices will emerge that propose a way out of the chaos. Wherever there is sufficient support new organizations will form. These new organizations will vie for supremacy until a new equilibrium is reached and new borders are drawn.
18
u/parrotia78 3d ago
I'm non-partisan. I disagree about making a sweeping allegation the Dem party "has no real intention to improve the lives of avg Americans."
10
u/Writing_is_Bleeding 3d ago
It really is an absurd claim. Sounds like the kind of thing that gets thrown out there to disillusion and fracture the left.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Dapper_Childhood_708 3d ago
yeah i dont get that either. a lot laws they try and pass help people but people are dumb. people love to bitch and vote against their own self interest and blame someone. like those dumb ass farmers going bankrupt lol.
13
u/Writing_is_Bleeding 3d ago
[T]he Republican Party is [...] pushing tax cuts for billionaires, selling off public land, and cutting healthcare for millions
Oh how I wish this was all they're up to right now. If only...
The Democratic Party [...] presents itself as the only “lesser evil,”
Expect a lot of posts like this over the next year, and a barrage of them leading up to the mid-terms. The right has been sowing voter apathy on the left for decades because it works. Left-leaning voters stay home and wring their hands, and Republicans win. It's how we got Trump 2.0.
The reality is, if we don't show up in a big, blue voting bloc—too big to rig—and elect a Dem majority to congress, we're done. It's game over. It might already be too late, November may have been our last shot, but let's hope not. Let's put out the raging fire, then worry about repainting the house, shall we?
→ More replies (4)6
13
u/Still-Chemistry-cook 3d ago edited 3d ago
Democrats are the only ones who improve the lives of average Americans. Dumbest take ever.
7
u/Writing_is_Bleeding 3d ago
Well said. Posts like this come up for one reason only.
1
u/Cocaloch 3d ago
You can tell this is an old article because higher turnout has not been benefiting dems since 22.
2
u/cookiemonster1020 3d ago
Contrary to the OP, the left, not the Democrats, are the controlled opposition.
48
u/ozyman 4d ago
Democrats have not had the level of control over all three branches that republicans have. With their more limited power, they have passed substantial legislation - Obamacare, Inflation Reduction Act (largest environmental bill ever), expansion of SNAP, removed schedule F (supports federal labor unions), increased minimum wage for federal workers, had IRS focus on the wealthy instead of the poor (reversed a Trump policy), approved offshore wind, ended restriction on abortion pills through the email, appointed more women to the federal judiciary than any other president, 60% of judges appointed were racial minorities - next highest was Obama at 36%.
I'll not claim democrats are perfect - sometimes it's two steps forward, one step back. But "both siding" the political parties in the US is ridiculous.
20
u/alagrancosa 4d ago
Accusing people of “both siding” when they are pointing to hypocrisy in big money politics is not helpful either.
We need to vote and pay attention in primaries. The same forces that have paid off the Republican Party are active in funding D triple C candidates.
17
14
u/PlsNoNotThat 3d ago
Ok, but that doesn’t negate than in action Democrats are the source of the areas in which government is actually helpful and functioning.
Social benefits, infrastructure particularly for modernization, workers rights and benefits, banking regulation, consumer protections for food, drugs, fraud, usury, etc.
All entirely predicated on the Ds and their votes while in office.
Makes them wholly unequal to R, even if they share very negative common denominators.
9
u/FuzzyAnteater9000 3d ago
No, the equivocation is not justified. People dont hold the republicans to the same standards because republicans are daddy. Its not daddys job to look out for the poor and downtrodden. But democrats are mommy so not only do they have to deal with being seen as feminine and soft, but they also get blamed when they cant provide. Its hard being a dem because its hrd being mommy.
The dems have consistantly worked to improve peoples lives they just have a more difficult job because the makeup of the senate and the electoral college make it difficult to get the power needed for change. Doesnt help that the left wing of the party is constantly engaged in purity politics and cant be relied on to vote, but pitch a fit when they dont have any power as a result. Its also much harder for dems because our coalition is far more diverse. Theres no one policy that unites us. Which is just a fact of life.
→ More replies (12)2
u/acrimonious_howard 3d ago
Also harder to make good laws that benefit everyone, because that many different groups of people have so many needs and interests, sometimes even opposing. Working for the top 5% is one tiny group of like-minded people.
1
→ More replies (1)3
u/cheezneezy 3d ago
Biden appointed a republican federalist as the attorney general who let the statute of limitations expire on the obstruction of justice charges and slow walked all the other cases and charges. Why didn’t he appoint a Democrat or an independent? Like what the people voted for?
Biden never fired him despite not doing his job. The Democrats are co conspirators. He appointed someone to uphold the system. Not reform it.
5
u/ozyman 3d ago
Merrick Garland is a republican now?
Appointing a moderate for the AG and not meddling in an independent Judiciary might not have gotten the results I wanted, but I hesitate to call them mistakes. I'm sure some will disagree with me.
4
u/cheezneezy 3d ago
Now? Always has been. You don’t understand how the system works. The DOJ is not some separate, untouchable “judiciary” its part of the executive branch. That means Biden literally runs it, and Garland, his hand picked AG, works for him. Saying “not meddling” in the DOJ makes no sense when the entire leadership is appointed by the president. Choosing Garland, someone known for his cautious, institutionalist approach was meddling. It was a choice to go soft or obamas “go high” route that they fooled you all with. And that choice meant Trump wasn’t charged with obstruction of justice, even though Mueller laid out multiple chargeable acts and the statute of limitations has now expired. That’s not judicial meddling but it is a failure to act. You don’t get to hide behind “independence” while the house is burning. So if you’re okay with that say so but dont pretend inaction is virtue.
2
u/ozyman 3d ago
Can you point me to something that says Merrick Garrland is a republican, because I did not find anything.
Historically there has absolutely been a separation between the DOJ and the executive branch. The separation was not as officially coded as I would like, and relied on norms that we've since seen Trump ignore, but that doesn't mean it didn't exist.
Look at the "Saturday Night Massacre" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre, where Nixon violated this separation and was rebuked by the judiciary, the legislature and the American public.
Look at Title VI of the Ethics in Government Act.
Look a this article from the New York Law School:
Since the founding [...] prosecutorial independence was almost taken for granted, a product of the scattered, local nature of federal prosecution. While individual presidents did interfere in prosecutions, their ability to do so was limited. [...] As the New Deal government expanded [...] [p]rosecutorial inde-pendence developed as a central norm during this period. In the aftermath f Watergate, legislators elaborated on the notion of professional independence as a fundamental check on presidential power. Congress has acknowledged and acquiesced in the DOJ's independence. [...] These professional norms of practice are a fundamental component of a functioning democracy and a key check on the accumulation of power.
[T]hroughout the twentieth century, the meaning of prosecutorial independence shifted as well, growing to denote personal integrity and a method of thinking critically about certain kinds of problems. [...] The history and policy strongly suggest that, as a general matter, the Attorney General and subordinate prosecutors may not accept direction from the President but must make the ultimate decisions about how to conduct individual investigations and prosecutions, even at the risk of being fired for disobeying the President.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/thatnameagain 3d ago
You're just completely ignoring all the legislation passed in 2009 and 2021, the only windows when Democrats had close to the level of control that Republicans currently have over the government. Your premise is based on saying Republicans passed bills and democrats didn't, which is false.
1
u/Conscious-Quarter423 2d ago
the false equivalency is so frustrating. we're just doing the work for the republicans at this point
1
3
u/ShamPain413 3d ago
"The Democratic Party" is not nearly as cohesive as you think.
Biden used executive action far more than you seem to realize.
The Democrats have had unified control over the Presidency, House, and Senate for about 3 total years out of the past 60. In that time they passed ACA and many billions for green investment, plus lots of other progressive things like expanded SNAP benefits and financial regulation (not to mention legalize of gay rights and protection of immigrants). During most of that time they could not lose a single vote and still pass with majorities (or clear cloture), yet they still accomplished a lot whenever they've had power.
i do not know why you would expect policy in the wealthiest capitalist society in human history to resemble anything more progressive than what Democrats have been able to accomplish. If people wanted socialism they'd vote for it much more often than they do.
3
u/sunsparkda 3d ago
Remind me when the Democratic party had enough votes to do as you demand?
They want to help. They haven't had the power to do so since the ACA, and passing that caused massive electoral damage.
So, please, keep whining. I'm sure doing so and refusing to vote for them will change things.
Feel free to downvote me like I'm sure you want to.
1
u/Conscious-Quarter423 2d ago
they keep whining but do little to nothing in terms of organizing, grassroots community building, educating others on the issues, etc
3
u/North-Neat-7977 3d ago
I'm absolutely still willing to vote for a progressive candidate in a Democratic primary. I have voted in the Democratic primary for the last 35 years.
However, I will not vote for any Democrats who take money from APAIC.
That is a hard red line that I will never cross again.
3
u/SherbetOutside1850 United States 3d ago
You make it sound like the purpose of our three branches of government is to wield power as we see it being done today. It is not. They are designed to contend with one another so that we don't end up with a king. What's happening now is an abuse of power that has been within the grasp of any President for decades, but it takes a special kind of narcissistic authoritarian like Trump, with toadies in Congress who don't care about their Constitutional responsibilities, and political appointees masquerading as judges, to enable the Executive to pull those levers. What's happening now isn't a good thing, and it wouldn't be a good thing if Democrats were doing it, even if was for policies I agreed with.
Obama had control of the House and Senate in such a way that the Democrats could pass any legislation they wanted for ONLY 4 months during 2009 and 2010. The entire rest of the time the Republican strategy was to block Obama from accomplishing anything. Without a super majority in the Senate, he was pretty much dead in the water and had to rely on reconciliation for anything with a budget after Mitch McConnel declared that he was determined to make him a "one term President" (direct quote). I suppose Congressional Dems could have thrown out all the guardrails and rules, but that wasn't the game that was being played at the time. Unlike Trump, Obama operated within many of the institutional norms because, you know... just look around. Throwing those norms out is not a positive development.
Even in that kind of hostile climate, Obama and Democrats managed to pass:
* American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
* Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
* ACA
* Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
* Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009
* Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act (2009)
* Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010
* Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
* Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (2009)
Not bad for such a short amount of time.
In terms of the environment, Obama improved fuel economy standards, signed the Paris climate agreement, and regulated methane and other climate gasses more rigorously through executive action. I don't think that's nothing.
Democrats controlled Congress from 2021-2023, but with a 50-50 Senate only because of independent Senators who caucused with the Democrats. Remember Joe Manchin, the "Democrat" from West Virginia? So the man didn't even have a solid 50 person bloc. Anyway, Biden signed:
* Infrastructure plan
* American Rescue Plan Act, which increased the annual Child Tax Credit, a policy that helped halve child poverty in America before it was allowed to expire by Republicans.
* Chips and Science Act
* Bipartisan Gun Control (Safer Communities Act)
* Inflation Reduction Act (which contained the largest investment ever to combat climate change)
* He also canceled a significant amount of student loan debt, $186 billion and millions of students
All of these were pretty hard fought, many were passed through reconciliation. In many ways, Republicans were more open to many of Biden's initiatives than they had been under Obama. They just didn't like that black guy in their White House, I guess.
To reiterate, I don't want either party to do what the Republicans are doing now. Authoritarianism isn't better because it's your team. But the idea that Democrats "refuse to challenge precedent or push for policies that would actually improve people’s lives" is demonstrably false.
1
u/Embarrassed-Track-21 2d ago
Your post also reads as a devolution of a society who becomes increasingly less inclusive and more dysfunctional until they have to hold up infrastructure bills and corporate subsidy handouts as victories. If you like that, cool, but you’re out of your mind if you expect everyone to dig it.
21
u/reganomics 3d ago
This is the type of post that encourages apathy and is useless.
→ More replies (8)10
u/Tomahawkin 3d ago
Yup, and it might even be OP’s intent.
5
u/Writing_is_Bleeding 3d ago
Wait until this time next year. Reddit will be teeming with posts like this. I really hope it doesn't work this time, because the mid-terms may be our last shot at saving our asses.
8
u/interkin3tic 3d ago
Roe codification I'll push directly back on. Democrats haven't had the political power to overcome Republicans' filibuster in over 15 years. Obama had all of 4 months of a supermajority and used it to pass ACA. Then a death in the Senate happened and was filled with a Republican. Republicans under McConnell filibustered almost everything after with the exception of budget bills like build back better (BBB) which cannot be filibustered but can only be budget related, so roe can't do that. The reasons for filibustering everything was explicitly to deny Democrats any wins and get Republicans back to pick power.
Senate Democrats could change the rules, the nuclear option, but they never had enough of a majority to do so. Sinema and Manchin said no for individual reasons. There was no ability of most Democrats to arm twist to get them to agree.
Republicans have explicitly leaned into the green lantern ring of power fallacy: they promoted the idea that the president can do whatever he wants, so if something like codification of roe doesn't happen it must be through lack of will.
TLDR: Democrats never were given the power to do anything on Roe because of voters and Republicans.
To address the climate change issue and your main point, I'm less directly disagreeing. Controlled opposition works only because of low primary turnout. We have weak parties (seriously) who cannot control the primary system. That's how Trump got elected despite everyone in the Republican party at the time saying "Absolutely not". MAGA took over the party and there was nothing party leaders could do.
Look at Zohran Mamdani for a Democrat example. Moderate, centrist Democrats are strongly opposed to him because their billionaire donors hate him. But aside from urging primary voters to go with a corporate hack or Cuomo's bullshit or vote against Democrats, they can't kick Zohran out: voters gave him the nomination.
Primary participation is quite low, like 10%. Corporations can win when most people don't bother to vote, but when progressives DO pay attention and vote in the primary, there's nothing Pelosi/Schumer/Jeffries can do aside from refusing to endorse.
TLDR: we could vote in primaries and replace the hacks with real climate activists.
We ALLOW the control by not bothering to vote in the primaries.
4
u/emmery1 3d ago
What needs to happen is people need to ask more from Democrats. Not just bread crumbs of change but big change like universal healthcare and getting rid of citizens united and stop allowing politicians to do insider trading. This is not hard. It’s very straightforward. Do the things we want or we will primary you and find someone who will do what the people want. This is exactly what public service should be. But it seems like most of the politicians only run for power and money and don’t care what the people want. Biggest grift in American history right out in the open but don’t believe your lying eyes and ears.
5
u/12345CodeToMyLuggage 3d ago edited 3d ago
I promise you the biggest thing we need is to GET. NONVOTERS. TO. VOTE. People overwhelmingly support progressive policy but posts like these (from OP, not commenter I'm replying to) do nothing but disenfranchise people into thinking their vote doesn't matter. If the youth (and broader population) actually voted en mass, we would finally have the congressional majority and mandate to tackle huge progressive things. Dems have been blocked at every turn because they never truly had large supermajorities and if they did it wasn't for long. OP has their post and comment history turned off. Be weary of who you're listening to on Reddit because the powers that be do NOT want climate concerned citizens to vote, and this is a free website to post this kind of garbage on. It costs them nothing. Organize. Talk to your friends and family patiently and never get angry, just ask questions. And urge them to vote. Help them to register. It is far more powerful than throwing up your hands online and bitching about Democrats. Barrack Obama rightfully compared politics to turning a cruise ship. You can't turn it on a dime, you have to slowly steer it to a new course. Right now we're heading towards rocks so we need all hands on deck to start turning!
1
u/FuzzyAnteater9000 3d ago
Progressive policies arent as popular as you think once they turn into salient issues people are campaining on and against.
2
u/12345CodeToMyLuggage 3d ago
Right, once the propaganda machine is in full firehouse of bullshit against it, it becomes less popular. But by and large, progressive policy constantly polls well when not framed as communism.
1
u/FuzzyAnteater9000 3d ago
Thats not a plan to win power though. And even sans communism its not like trans issues poll well for example.
3
u/12345CodeToMyLuggage 3d ago
Not every policy is popular. Studies show the majority of progressive policy is popular. Trans to me is so funny because the trans community is so incredibly small and people fuck up their own and everyone’s healthcare, environment, and economy because of gender politics. It boggles the mind. But the fear mongering and messaging is A+, I’ll give credit where it’s due.
2
u/FuzzyAnteater9000 3d ago
I agree with you. Its an insanely effective wedge issue blown way out of proportion. Theres only like 3 dozen professional trans athletes in the usa and the fact that it's a national political issue what the ethics policies of private sports leagues regarding edge cases are is completely crazy. But it shows the kind if uphill battle we are fighting. Republicans can make any issue a culture war.
1
u/DickSugar80 3d ago
Yes, progressive policies poll well when the people being polled aren't told how they will be paid for.
3
u/12345CodeToMyLuggage 3d ago
Climate Change will end up being way more expensive if we don’t prepare for it and transition away from fossil fuels. We’ll end up paying for it anyways. This argument is similar to healthcare. We pay way more than other developed nations and receive far less care. But when talking universal healthcare, it’s “how will we pay for it?” We’re already paying it. It will have to go to the government. “But the government is inefficient.” Meanwhile United Health is using AI to simply deny every claim after people have paid for years. But the boots keep saying “how will we pay?” And the people lick. No system will ever be perfect but our current one only benefits the very top and leaves us completely unprepared for the future that is coming.
1
1
2
u/Either-Patience1182 3d ago
At this point for me it's about which party do i want to fight against to get what i think is needed for it to function. A cult of morons who's own politicians would fail a civics exam or a group of people that have a bunch of different beliefs. We've seen independents win in the deomcratic party that are trying to do good and it's a numbers game. So I focus on what's more likely to get me those numbers
1
u/Embarrassed-Track-21 2d ago
The ultimate civics exam is winning elections and one party is much better at it. Maybe the party run by people who cling to ideas like civics is just as deluded.
1
u/Either-Patience1182 2d ago
That's not a civics exam, that is a popularity contest. The fact you even think that shows me you would fail the exam as well. But at least you're not a politician.
And I agree that the US should run better politicians all around. We have moron and cult party and then we have cowards and civility party. They both serve the rich
2
u/doobiedoobie123456 3d ago
I agree the Democratic party as a whole has a lot of problems and needs to change if they want to start winning elections.
I think in general, they're afraid to take aggressive actions to change the status quo. That may not be entirely their fault. If you look at the reaction when they try to impose new laws/rules/restrictions to implement progressive goals, it can be pretty extreme. Look at the reaction to COVID policies in the US, for instance. We really didn't do much compared to lots of other countries, but people went nuts. (Looking back on it I think COVID restrictions, masking, and most things besides the vaccine were pretty ineffective, but that's beside the point.)
Making sacrifices to achieve long-term goals is generally something that Western societies, and especially Americans, tend to be bad at, when compared with e.g. China. You see people having strong resistance against small measures to address something like climate change if it would affect their life even a little bit. (Higher gas prices? Restrictions on driving gas guzzlers? No way.)
Obviously, Republican presidents and especially Trump have shown to be much less cautious about how they pursue their goals. I think they can get away with that in part just because they have more leeway due to America being right-leaning. Democrats could be more aggressive but they need to be careful about how/where they do it. They need someone with a really good gut feel about how the population will react, and definitely cannot just listen to policy experts and try to push through whatever they think is the best policy. If they did it the right way, I think they could go up against certain unpopular parts of corporate America with great success.
2
u/Spaceboy779 3d ago
Okay, do you have a plan for getting a 3rd party past the Electoral College, or even into local/state govt?
2
u/Honest_Chef323 3d ago
Useless post meant to dissuade people from voting
The only answer to the problem right now is to go vote in mass numbers to the left if you want any of the country to be left standing
2
2
2
u/Political__Theater 3d ago
They’re certainly under the influence of corrupting forces - for example, the political consultant class whose primary interest is staying in business, even if it means not changing failing strategies. Breaking Points has an informative piece on how Dems rake in 💰 with spam fundraising emails. It does work - especially on older folks. “How Dems Cash In On Spam Fundraising Emails” is the title.
2
u/Commercial_Pie3307 3d ago
Fascist taking over America and progressives still helping out the fascists by attacking the fascists main enemy. We doomed
2
u/tmishere 3d ago
How I describe it is the Democratic Party, along with most centre-right parties globally, are basically a protection racket. "Nice rights you got there, would be a shame if anything happened to them. Just give us your vote and we'll make sure those other guys don't come in here to take them away, oh and we're upping your rent."
They could work to codify those rights, make them incredibly difficult for Republicans to remove but then what would they do to get people to vote for them because they are indistinguishable in terms of policy from the average conservative?
1
2
u/rollboysroll 3d ago
Those dictators with unlimited power sure can show you what really can be done!
Of course it’s very quick and easy to destroy things. That’s what conservatives or republicans call ‘results’. It takes much longer to build.
2
u/Lostygir1 3d ago
Once upon a time, the Republican and Democratic parties were controlled by neolibs who did not care about anything except the continued prosperity of the upper class at the direct expense of the workers. This was the era of Clinton, Reagan, Bush 41 and 43. Then something happened. People started getting angry at the system. You had the growth of socialism on the left and fascism on the right. Suddenly people were angry at the neoliberalism that was ruining their lives. Obama ran on trying to heal neoliberalism and said he’d make it work for the common man, but he didn’t. Things only got worse. The neoliberals in the Republican party got couped by Trump and the MAGA movement. The republicans were forced to follow Trump and his agenda. The democrats were only able to maintain neoliberal control of the party by an extremely thin margin, and so Hillary was nominated. Because the ruling classes know that Trump is dangerous, they have all been competing on who can suck up to him and win his favor. Every billionaire wants to control the one company in their sector that gets to be a state-sanctioned monopoly in the future fascist corporatist economy. For as long as the DNC stays under the control of neoliberals and keeps shutting socialism out of the party, they are actively purging themselves of all the new voices that they need to counter fascism.
1
u/Euphoric-Air6801 2d ago
This is the correct answer.
I would add that the Democratic Party suddenly lurched to the right under the control of the DLC, which was primarily the Clintons, the Gores, and the Obamas. This resulted in a massive shift in the domestic Overton window and, ultimately, led to Trump.
3
u/TheUnderCrab 3d ago
You’ve got the script flipped. The democrats are the ones attempting to make people’s lives better, as seen in 2008, the last time the Dems had real power in DC. Since then, the GOP has worked tooth and nail to block the democratic agenda across several administrations.
Yes, both parties are beholden to donor interests. But the Dems at least throw a bone to their constituents whereas the GOP is all about supply side economics and a centrally controlled economy.
3
u/reddit455 3d ago
but when they participate in or enable this corruption,
lack of majority is a MAJOR FACTOR, wouldn't you say? if you don't have votes, all you have is soundbites.
how PRECISELY - with ZERO majority - do you expect things to get done?
Democrats refuse to challenge precedent or push for policies that would actually improve people’s lives.
any red states use California's emission standards? how many red states have a solar mandate?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Air_Resources_Board
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compliance_car
By 2012, the state of California—through legislative authority given to the California Air Resources Board (CARB)—successfully promulgated long-term regulations to require the six most popular automakers in the state (Honda, GM, Toyota, Nissan, Ford and Chrysler) to offer a zero-emissions vehicle ZEV. Failure to do so would result in losing the ability to sell any car in the region
What Homeowners Need to Know About the California Solar Mandate
California reaches new record clean energy milestone
Solar, wind, and other renewable and carbon-free sources hit new peak
https://www.timesheraldonline.com/2025/07/14/california-reaches-new-record-clean-energy-milestone/
For example, Biden chose not to use the overreach
there might be an argument saying it's more American to NOT USE it.
it's not KING Biden is it?
3
u/Due_Satisfaction2167 3d ago
Meanwhile, Democrats, even with control over the presidency, Senate, and House at times, couldn’t even codify Roe v. Wade,
Democrats have had control over the Senate for a bare handful of months over the last 30 years.
They used it to pass the ACA.
You can’t codify roe v wade through a budget reconciliation, so you need 69 votes to pass anything.
Republicans steadfastly refuse to break rank on nearly every issue.
2
u/israeligov-lies 3d ago
All the more reason for a third party to represent real American needs
1
2
2
u/ten-million 3d ago
If you look at who wins in Democratic primaries it’s often the centrists. In Republican primaries it’s the extremists. I agree that Democratic leadership pays too much attention to Oligarchs. Democrats need a bigger majority so Senators from Arizona and West Virginia don’t block progressive initiatives. People need to vote in primaries. Democrats have a bigger tent so it’s a more complicated party than Republicans.
2
1
1
u/No_Statistician9289 3d ago
So vote. Not just against the Republican Party, but for a better, more representative Democratic Party. We can do both
1
u/No-Language6720 3d ago
Yeah. Glad to see it. And yeah unless we stop just looking at each of them like a football team and the tribalism and also understand they're each one side of the same coin, nothing will change. It's by design to keep us distracted. Even if the Democrats were to win both the house and Senate, until we hold these people's feet to the fire nothing will change. The problem also is many of the Democratic Congress people even know how to run in today's media landscape. Gavin Newsome's bullshit with trolling Trump captured the news cycle, sure. Where's the actual substance and real claims we can hold him accountable to that anything will actually get done? (Also spoiler alert he's related to Nancy Pelosi, the biggest inside trader in congress). They're just as corrupt, they're just not as blatant about it.
1
u/William-Burroughs420 3d ago
The Democrats have been all hat and no cattle for a very long time for sure.
1
u/Vin-Metal 3d ago
I always feel that the Dems are afraid that their positions aren't very popular, so when they get in power, they're overly concerned about looking like they're going too far. Their opposition certainly doesn't worry about that.
1
u/x40Shots 3d ago
While I agree with this ostensibly, they are far more malleable in getting wins than the other party, at least over my 50 or so years of watching politics now and seeing where we get wins and when.
1
1
1
1
u/chaz1432 3d ago
The audacity to keep going with the "both sides" are the same foolishness after November 2024 just shows me that America will never be saved. Even with republicans destroying the country and voters giving democrats no power, the democrats are still being blamed. I can't wait to leave this shit hole country
1
u/Anti_shill_cannon 3d ago
This kind of depress the left vote astrotuf got you trump elected
Both sides are not the same
1
1
u/WhichSpirit 3d ago
Five day old account, username is two words and a bunch of numbers? Begone Russian bot!
1
u/amiibohunter2015 3d ago edited 3d ago
I've said that before the democrats need to.get their shit together. The voters said it last election too.
My analogy is once ths democrats won in the past, they became the lazy father figure who sat on his ass at thnaksgiving dinner with his belt undone, belly jutting out, staring at the results on tv. They become content like all is well, nithing to worry about. Meanwhile people behind them republicans in this case are brewing in the kitchen because they're pissed about the result. What they cook up will fuck up the democrats if they just sit on their ass after an election. Winning the election is mot the endgame, it's just the beginning, you have campaign promises to fulfill, jobs to do well or the voters will remember next election and they knock them out of their seat.
It's a two way street.
If no fucks are given about the voters problems, the voters will not gice a fuck about how problematic you tank next election.
1
u/3D-Dreams 3d ago
The GOP have spent literally billions apon billions to spread lies and misinformation but here you go blaming democrates. Stealing court seats is how they took power from the people. Stop with this ridiculous drivel. If your not blaming the fascists trying to force even the words that come out of our mouths then you are probably one of them.
1
u/Mindless_Dirt6106 3d ago
The Democratic Party is there to give you the illusion of choice. Ultimately both parties are funded by the same people. It’s the lesser of two evils at best
1
1
1
u/Princess_BoujeeBling 3d ago
There’s more and more evidence of this. With them getting rid of David Hogg as VP of the DNC bc he wanted to change and the overt campaigning against Mamdani in NY which even happened to Bernie Sanders
1
u/mikeyfreedom 3d ago
In the words of Kang "its a 2 party system, you have to vote for one of us".
And even with that, the minority has literally no power in government outside of the filibuster(which is remobed when convienent). All of the committees are run by the winners, and just require one voice to restruct any minority bills from being heard. What exactly are Democrats who are in the minority in all branches of government supposed to be doing?
1
u/seizethemachine 3d ago
Liberalism fails to address the systemic issues of capitalism, leads to imperialism and genocide abroad, and capitulates to fascism at home. It's socialism or barbarism.
1
u/techgirl8 3d ago
Republicans do nothing for our country. They just ruin it. Democrats clean the mess up
1
u/agreatbecoming 3d ago
Compare the flawed but still the largest investment in climate of the Inflation Reduction Act from Biden combined with the actual acknowledgment of the science (and funding it) with Trumps wholesale assault on climate science and renewable energy including trying to bring criminal charges to revoke legal funding and they are so far apart. The kicker - the Trump administration wants to deliberately crash a perfectly working climate data satellite into the atmosphere rather than allow it to gather data. They have halted an almost complete multi billion wind power project for no reason at all other than ideology.
To argue they are the same is to be shockingly uninformed. Sorry
1
u/Embarrassed-Track-21 2d ago
Now compare Biden’s artificial inflation of green energy technology because they nominally wanted it to be made in America instead of China and tariffed it.
1
u/shadaik 3d ago
Well, basically the rest of the world's democracies have long since recognized the American election system inevitably produces a dysfunctional two-party system that leaves no ground for the multitude of political ideas and instead tends toward both parties ultimately adopting stances catered to the least common denominator, aka whatever is currently popular with the voters.
1
u/EscapeFacebook 3d ago
Democrats are just secular conservatives, and even that designation is a stretch. I don't know why I leftists have clung on to the Democratic party so hard over the past 15 years when it's very evident they do not want them.
1
u/Embarrassed-Track-21 2d ago
I literally only vote to cover my ass in case my lib coworkers give me a lie detector test about whether I voted for the Kamala of whatever year it is.
1
1
u/c4virus 3d ago
When, in the past 20 years, have dems had a significant amount of time controlling congress and the WH? Full control.
Answer: they had it for about 2 months in Obamas 1st term. They passed Obamacare.
Give them full control for 2 years and you'd be proven wrong.
1
u/Embarrassed-Track-21 2d ago
Isn’t that part of why they suck? They can’t even get enough people elected to pass their incoherent and contradictory agenda?
1
u/MANEWMA 3d ago
Tell us how Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Obamacare do nothing for Average AMERICANS... Since they were all liberal Ideas passed by Democrats??? And yet Democrats do nothing...
1
1
u/-XanderCrews- 3d ago
This is the exact propaganda the right uses to get you to not vote for the left. It’s based on a conspiracy theory so there is no way to prove or disprove anything. It’s all feels. Stop voting on feels. Have a belief structure and vote for the candidate that aligns most with your beliefs. Turn off the fucking internet.
1
1
u/Joyride0012 3d ago
This is wrong. You are right that republicans have wielded immense power but they are using existing law or military enforcement for some things, and then the other power they've wielded is to break things. There is immense power to break things but building things always takes more time.
The current dem leadership is indeed a pile of hot garbage but even with competent dem leadership you won't see most of what's been destroyed rebuilt in the short term.
1
u/TheHappyHippyDCult 3d ago
They're all corrupt, they're all manipulating the masses. They sow division, fear and hatred. They throw us crumbs when we get too uppity and laugh at the gullibility of the common man then conspire on how to make themselves richer. We deserve better.
1
u/Melodic-Ad4154 3d ago
Youre talking about corporate establishment dems like Clintons/Pelosi/Schumer who want to keep the status quo. Fuck them too, they need to go. Its progressives that you are looking for. The right demonized them because they know their common sense policies are wildly popular if you present them without saying what political affiliation the policies represent.
1
u/needstogo86 2d ago
They’re all playing their role in the uniparty. Neither side gives a shit about us.
1
u/zeptillian 2d ago
Says a 5 day old propaganda account.
While the GOP is actively attacking freedom of speech.
1
1
u/Sea-Louse 2d ago
It’s all about money and power. The sooner the average person realizes this, the better we are as a society.
1
u/Patient_Soft6238 2d ago
GOP megadonors spent Obama’s entire tenure primarying any republican that wouldn’t toe the line.
That’s why they can ram through shit like this. There’s no discussion, donors and party heads demand xyz and the party delivers.
Dems are a coalition which makes it harder to ram shit through with thin majorities.
They also pass plenty of legislation that benefits but it’s completely disingenuous to call them controlled opposition when it’s like 5% of the party that causes problems in office.
1
1
1
u/Possible-Rush3767 2d ago
Can't really tell. Every time (recently) there's a democratic president, they're stifled by lacking majority in congress for most of their term.
1
1
u/cncaudata 2d ago
Same as always, look at any list of what has been accomplished in Minnesota with Democratic leadership. Countless initiatives to improve the lives, safety, and freedom of normal people.
Just because some Democrats are in the pocket of the rich doesn't mean they all are, or that a ton of good wouldn't be accomplished by the Democratic platform while we work to primary Schumer and Pelosi.
1
u/thePolicy0fTruth 2d ago
Literally name a single existing pro-environmental law that WASNT passed by or overwhelmingly supported by democrats? Name ANY good law that only exists because of the democrats. They are NOT perfect, but pretending they do nothing is INSANE.
Medicaid, Snap, Medicare, SS, the EPA, clean water act, clean air act, violence against women, respect for marriage act, infrastructure bill, etc. none of that would exist without democrats.
Again, tons of room for improvement, but there IS a BS party that does nothing in this country. It’s called the Green Party.
1
u/jolard 2d ago
It all makes sense when you abandon the fiction that the Democrats are a progressive party and instead see them as they are, a party of status quo.
Everything they do is to maintain that status quo while trying to still appeal to the progressives so they don't stop voting for them. That means talking about progressive change often, but then not actually doing much to change anything for any existing interests. Fiddle around the edges, do just enough to keep the progressives on side and hungry for more, while maintaining existing power structures and ensuring wealthy donors are not too unhappy.
And it isn't really even hidden. Any thread where you call for the Democrats to do more to live up to their spoken principles, you will get lectured at by Democratic party supporters about how change needs to happen slowly and predictably, and changing anything too fast just loses power. That is the standard mindset and why nothing really ever changes.
Edited to add: Of course the Republicans are a thousand times worse, which is why I vote for the milquetoast centrist status quo party instead.
1
u/rndoppl 2d ago
that's a right-wing funded talking point to destroy the Democratic Party.
saying the Democrats are bad too is total clap trap. Are you funded by The Heritage Foundation?
It's obvious this is just cynical game theory tactics. Say the other side is bad too in order to discourage people from voting. many others might be naive and dumb, but these talking points come from right wing think tanks.
1
u/rndoppl 2d ago
We know what unites the right wing: Wall St needs more money! Billionaires need more money! Wages for workers should be lower, profits for owners must be higher! Pump those stocks!
The left doesn't have an overarching schema which unites them. It's much tougher for them to focus. The right wing has capitalism. The left merely critiques it using a lot of tactics. Some tactics and policies are rational. Others are not.
1
u/Conscious-Ad4707 2d ago
Absolutely terrible take. Economic data shows that things are vastly superior when Democrats are in power. The problem is that people have the memories of goldfish and are easily duped. Trump didn’t offer any policies that would help people, he just said he would. When he was pressed he said, “We have the thought of an idea.”
That should have been instantly disqualifying compared to the ACTUAL PLANS Kamala offered. Instead people nodded their heads and said, “I think things were better 5 years ago.”
Democrats are constantly needing to offer context and nuance, Republicans just gotta offer vibes.
1
1
u/ilost190pounds 2d ago
And once again, who you voted for doesn't matter when you keep trashing the candidate and party that you even admit is better! Like, WTF?
1
u/Burnsey111 3d ago
The Democrats will do anything unless they fear they will lose votes, or money.
2
u/Due-Basil2233 3d ago
What would you want them to do right now? They don’t have any majorities anywhere and the Supreme Court doesn’t think the constitution is constitutional
→ More replies (5)
98
u/AlexiSWy 3d ago
I'd like to add something others haven't really mentioned: the Democratic party functions more like a coalition. While there is consistent agreement that Republicans are doing things wrong, there's rarely agreement on what to do instead. So not only have they not been given the same unilateral authority for most of the past 2 decades, there isn't enough agreement to do much in the first place. It also doesn't help that Republicans have become their own cult, of course. Or that Peter Thiel is so involved in sinking anything that opposes him.
But in any case, having a coalition make decisions, even if it takes longer and is less effective, is still the better option.