I Think We Have Lost

Politics & Elections
61

It’s stories like these that leave me bereft.

In reality, Biden has done a lot. But he’s not a wizard. He can’t just wave a wand. And he has powerful forces arrayed against him: RW media, the Republican Party, fossil fuels and health care profiteers, among others, a once-in-a-century pandemic that half the country is trying to pretend is No Big Deal and worst of all, a government that was deliberately sabotaged and hollowed out by Trump.

But no one cares about any of that. It’s just easier to hate on Biden.

62

Because Biden is a dictator, and can solve all these issues by decree.

63

But it sounds so much nicer than “give me all your money and fuck you”

64

That might infuriate me more than anything - that too many people are too fucking stupid to see why the dems haven’t been able to accomplish what they’ve hoped to, so far, and moronically default with a lazy “duuuuuuur Biden disappointing” flail-out.
Not the most promising development for elections.

65

You guys are defining this as evil conservatives against the Democrats. But the people you’ve really lost are not the conservatives - you never had them. Who you’ve lost is the middle. You are rapidly losing the Hispanics you thought would turn Texas blue. You are losing some of the black vote.

The crazy teacher’s unions are causing you to lose the suburban female vote, which has been a strong demographic for Democrats in the Trump era. You have socialists in your party alienating moderates. And your extreme tactics in trying to push around Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin have caused damage to the party in those states and increased the popularity of both of them with their voters. And you picked a Presidential candisate who is busy calling half the country enemies of the state while saying he’s going to be a unifier.

These are all self inflicted wounds. There is an obvious path to sucess as a center- left capitalist party that focuses on the working class, but instead you let the far left define the party and focused on things that normies don’t much care about while ignoring or making worse the things they do, such as border security, crime, education and inflation.

66

Well, he does control the weather… doesn’t he??

67

Sure… if you only get your news from right wing sources that tend to misrepresent reality, I could see how you would come to those conclusions.

Unfortunately, you are not alone, you are not the only person who believes in this alternate reality that is spun forth by right wing propaganda.

Some of us are trying to fight against that propaganda, and fight for reality. It certainly is an uphill battle though, as it is so much easier to believe a lie than it is to spend some effort in understanding the truth.

68

The Democratic Party is barely even center left, let alone far left. Only in Right Wing World is spending on infrastructure and poor families with children considered a far left agenda.

And now it appears that a commitment to helping citizens exercise their right to vote is also socialism.

69

That is very, very divorced from the reality that I see. The Democratic Party is not:

  • advocating universal, free-at-the-point-of-service healthcare
  • advocating free university education
  • guaranteeing anyone a job or an income
  • actively courting unions or promoting labor organizations

or really any other far-left issue. They’re not even really center-left. I would say center-right, now that the Overton window is where it is.

To me, one central issue is that the Democrats seem prone to compromising when they should be holding the line, and caving when they should compromise. I see a lot of complaints that those irritating far-left activists are dragging the party to the left and failing to vote the party line when it counts, undermining the party, but the reality I see is that they don’t really have a strategy the way the Republicans do. True, the Republican strategy is largely negative, preventing things from getting done rather than accomplishing them, but they are holding power.

It seems to me that if the Democrats were to combat that with specific, concrete, practical proposals that would accomplish something, that would give them the capital for some of the more nebulous social programs that I (much farther to the left) want. I mean, look at what the WPA accomplished: a lot of what they built is still there, and would bring the party back in touch with the working class it needs.

The other factor is that somebody needs to grow a spine and admit that taxes are too low, and that they need to go up. Stop relying on feel-good (or, in Trump’s case, word-salad) soundbites, and speak to the public as if we were grown-ups. Have the hard conversations. Maybe it’s too late for that, though.

70

Hey but it’s crazy teachers unions, socialists and normies all the way down.

71

Actually, a lot of what the right wing media tells you is crazy itself.

https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/2021-right-wing-media-scapegoated-unions-supposed-school-indoctrination-covid-

For over a decade, conservative media have blamed various societal problems on unions. In 2010 and 2011, Fox News personalities and guests repeatedly — and falsely — claimed collective bargaining by public sector unions was the cause of local and state budget shortfalls. Some in conservative media counterintuitively blamed unions for rising economic inequality or for the decline of America’s automotive industry. They fearmongered that allowing Transportation Security Administration employees to unionize would jeopardize national security, and they even falsely blamed union workers for a slow response to a blizzard in New York City in 2010.

This past year has proved no exception, despite the impacts of the global pandemic. Conservative media blamed collective organizing for a baffling array of national and international issues.

Orwellian too.

Over the last year, conservatives spun “critical race theory” (CRT) into a key phrase in the national cultural and political landscape, marking a new battle in the unceasing culture wars. Right-wing media and hundreds of right-wing Facebook groups helped, using empty but dangerous and often racist rhetoric to depict CRT as a threat and energize the Republican base.

Critical race theory is a decades-old academic framework, typically taught in graduate-level courses, that explores how racism is structurally embedded in U.S. institutions. However, conservatives have co-opted the phrase to bash any discussion of systemic racism and racial justice efforts. In particular, right-wing activists have attacked curricula in K-12 classes, where critical race theory is not generally taught. Anti-CRT advocates instead push for children to be miseducated by a whitewashed version of history that ignores systemic racism and the culturally diverse history of the country, including contributions of Black people and other people of color. The push against CRT has also converged with anti-LGBTQ movements, with many of the same tactics used to attack LGBTQ inclusion and specifically target trans individuals.

Right-wing media’s manufactured hysteria about CRT has helped spawn bans on books and on teaching certain concepts in many states and school districts, undermining educational standards for American students. As of December, 29 states have introduced bills or taken other steps to limit how public school teachers can discuss racism and sexism in the classroom, and 13 states have enacted such restrictions. This strategy is part of a long history of white backlash against racial justice movements in which right-wing media have gleefully led the way. Right-wing attacks on public education also dovetail with a larger conservative push to privatize K-12 schooling.

72

Thanks for the responses. Many/most libs would favor military cuts, but the Dem politicians/administrators? I feel much of today’s military spending is a jobs program combined w/ and personal/corporate welfare.

And Social Security has always been redistributive, from Day 1 in the 30s when our great grandparents got benefits from a sitter they never paid into.

SS has been changed many times over the years. Mostly expansive. Payments to spouses, children, the disabled. Does the ratchet only work one way? Or is there a reason that our society couldn’t decide that someone with a high enough net worth was in a good enough position that they could forego a portion of what they contributed to SS?

With increased life expenditures, how well are an individual’s lifetime SS benefits related to their contributions?

And then there is Medicare. Keeps getting expanded in ways completely unrelated to individuals’ payments…

73

You’re not wrong. But it is a jobs program that also tends to look for a use, and it’s not polite when we use it. We could put all those people to work in actual jobs programs, building bridges and roads and other infrastructure, responding to natural (or man made) disasters. For the cost of one missile, we could house dozens of people for years. Rather than building missiles to break other people’s stuff, we could be building stuff that actually benefits us.

For some reason though, it’s easier to justify spending millions on destruction than spending it on improving the lives of our fellow citizens. That’s a national psychological problem that I don’t have any answers to.

For the most part, yeah. It’s hard to get people to give up what they have. I don’t know that it’s a bad thing, so long as we can afford it, to make sure that tomorrow is better than today, for everyone.

They kinda do. If you are paying the max into SS, you aren’t going to be getting it all back. The limit on payout has less room than the ceiling on payment.

Personally, I don’t care that the wealthy get the same things as the less wealthy, as, kinda by definition, there are far fewer of them. If you are trying to make a policy that keeps the top 1% from receiving the same benefit as the rest, then that is going to create various perverse incentives, it’s going to trap some people in a hole, and is most certainly going to increase the cost of administration by more than you are saving on payouts.

I think that SS is much better solved by applying it to 100% of earnings, rather than having a cap at $140k or whatever it is this year. Apply it to capital gains and other investment income as well. I think that we’d rapidly see the SS system become solvent.

That’s a problem in many ways, but that’s better solved from reforming our healthcare system. You are not wrong though, that Medicare is often going to pay out more than an individual paid in. That is mostly kept solvent through people who paid in all their lives dying before they are old enough to qualify, but people are living longer now.

The problem really comes down to the fact that you can spend an unlimited amount of money trying to keep someone alive for another year, month, week or day. We do need to have a conversation about what another day of keeping grandpa alive is worth, and what society is willing to pay for it. (Of course, that leads to the “death panels” that were such a large part of the successful campaigning of Republicans against universal healthcare.)

74

Yeah, 'coz health insurance companies never act as death panels. “What? You won’t cover that drug because it’s too expensive?”

75

You’re correct, of course.

Trouble is, the propaganda that is being spun that sucks people in now defines “Center-right” as being “socialist, crazy union loving lefties”. As said upthread, these people are divorced from reality. They have bought the bullshit.

76

For some reason, it is fine for private entities to have the power of life and death over you, but not the govt.

77

I suppose it is more noble to deny coverage on the basis of profit than on the basis of what is reasonable for the common good.

78

I’ve worked for SS for 36 years. The lifespan of the trust funds has been an issue for my entire career. It is so stupid. So many possible tweaks.

-Jack up - or eliminate as you propose - the earnings cap. Or, possibly the donut approach. Don’t apply it to $140-300k or so, and then reinstate it >$300.

-Then bump up the withholding percentage - just a few hundredths of a percent. Could even be done on a graduated basis - higher for higher income.

-Then increase retirement age - as has been done.

-And then add in means testing for the wealthy.

Best approach would be a combination of all 4. Tiny nudges are all it would take to move that asteroid. But no one has the will do to anything until it is crashing down on us.

So many aspects of SS have just been stupid giveaways. Such as spouses able to take under each others’ accounts w/ no penalty. Hell, my sister stopped working. He husband still works. They BOTH draw under her acct. When he retires, they will both take under his. No excuse for that loophole - which has been closed.

Is farm welfare a liberal or conservative program?

k9 - I suspect you and. I would find more in common that we differ over.

79

The Democrats aren’t? Illinois Governor Pritzker signed a bill less than a year ago expanding the number of issues the Chicago Teacher’s Union (CTU) can strike over.

Pritzker signs bill making it easier for Chicago Teachers Union to walk out on students (illinoispolicy.org)

80

Barring elections reform, you can’t tell if they are even a center party*, let alone center-right. based on how many people actually do vote for the “far right” candidates. It feels like doublespeak to label a party as “center-right” when 45% or more of the voters voted to the right of them.

Even if we implement common sense liberalization of voting rights and processes and thus increase the percentage of votes cast by double digits, and they all go to the left of the GQP, then that would still only make the Democratic party a center party, with a mix of center-right and center-left candidates.

*I don’t want to use the term “Centrist” because that implies a deliberate triangulation bordering on bothsidesism.