Stop demonizing Trump supporters.

[run32.dll]

3 minutes ago, Ominous said:

 

Eliminate voter suppression and run candidates that actually encourage non-whites and people under 40 to vote. 

You have to either use the electoral system or mass organization and mobilization to achieve that. It would be a lot easier to achieve running candidates and doing organizing that doesn't antagonize or ignore them. These people pay for the sins of the system too. They lost sons and daughters to war. They're losing loved ones to the opioid epidemic. What if we offered them material improvements without trying to guilt them and continuing to run campaigns based almost entirely around culture war that they view as an attack on them? Is punishing them really more important than laying the groundwork for solidarity?

[Uaarkson]

6 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

You have to either use the electoral system or mass organization and mobilization to achieve that. It would be a lot easier to achieve running candidates and doing organizing that doesn't antagonize or ignore them. These people pay for the sins of the system too. They lost sons and daughters to war. They're losing loved ones to the opioid epidemic. What if we offered them material improvements without trying to guilt them and continuing to run campaigns based almost entirely around culture war that they view as an attack on them? Is punishing them really more important than laying the groundwork for solidarity?

 

These people represent a rapidly shrinking demographic. Fuck em.

[Fizzzzle]

16 minutes ago, ort said:

Figure out a way to eliminate the electoral college and/or have the senate more closely match the political values of the country it represents.

 

16 states, including California and New York, have signed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, wherein states who signed the compact would pledge to place all of their votes to whoever won the national popular vote, regardless of who won in their state. It would effectively nullify the electoral college if enough states signed onto it. It's pending in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and South Carolina. If, theoretically, it passed in all of those states, you would only need 1 or 2 more before you hit 270 electoral votes.

 

Alternatively, states could choose to switch to a popular vote system and pledge their votes based on that, but that is harder to pull off and comes with its own problems.

 

edit: I forgot to mention the Compact would only actually become a thing IF enough states sign it. Right now things stay as they are.

[legend]

7 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

You have to either use the electoral system or mass organization and mobilization to achieve that. It would be a lot easier to achieve running candidates and doing organizing that doesn't antagonize or ignore them. These people pay for the sins of the system too. They lost sons and daughters to war. They're losing loved ones to the opioid epidemic. What if we offered them material improvements without trying to guilt them and continuing to run campaigns based almost entirely around culture war that they view as an attack on them? Is punishing them really more important than laying the groundwork for solidarity?

 

I have no doubt plenty of regular people on the left are antagonizing them because people have had it. But you think Biden is antagonizing them? I mean, we can always say "Biden should say more" -- that's a bar we can indefinitely raise, but you think he's out right antagonizing them? 

[run32.dll]

8 minutes ago, Uaarkson said:

 

These people represent a rapidly shrinking demographic. Fuck em.

Their ranks are about to grow. The economic recovery is going to take 5+ years and there will be a lot of people without a job to go back to because it closed permanently during the pandemic. Local and state governments are facing layoffs from reduced revenues which will have a ripple effect. Millions are going to lose their homes. If Biden runs the same recovery plan of the Obama administration, which the people he's surrounding himself with strongly suggests he will, we will find ourselves soon in the same conditions that enabled Trump to win. Running more candidates that tell them the system is fine, we just need moderate tweaks here and there will not work.
 

4 minutes ago, legend said:

 

I have no doubt plenty of regular people on the left are antagonizing them because people have had it. But you think Biden is antagonizing them? I mean, we can always say "Biden should say more" -- that's a bar we can indefinitely raise, but you think he's out right antagonizing them? 

Biden is largely just still ignoring them. It's who they see latched onto him that they seek to "own" by voting for Trump. Neither candidate differs much on material policy so trying to dunk on the other team in the culture war is what they have.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

It's truly wonderful how we can write off whole segments of the population because they're "hicks"

[run32.dll]

 

[legend]

21 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

Biden is largely just still ignoring them. It's who they see latched onto him that they seek to "own" by voting for Trump. Neither candidate differs much on material policy so trying to dunk on the other team in the culture war is what they have.

 

I'm not sure I agree with him ignoring them. He's made a lot of efforts to go out to rural areas in his campaign and tried to talk about the issues that they are facing, especially during this pandemic. As I said, we can always indefinitely raise the bar, but it's not ignoring them. I am glad to hear you don't think he's antagonizing them though.

 

As far as the polices not being being materially different I vehemently disagree. Trump's mishandling of the pandemic, his efforts to dismantle health care in general, and his stupid trade war with China has absolutely impacted rural communities. Trump very clearly cares only about his bottom line and since his supports mind bogglingly support him while he literally leaves them out in the cold means he'll continue to fuck them to his personal benefit.

[Greatoneshere]

40 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

You have to either use the electoral system or mass organization and mobilization to achieve that. It would be a lot easier to achieve running candidates and doing organizing that doesn't antagonize or ignore them. These people pay for the sins of the system too. They lost sons and daughters to war. They're losing loved ones to the opioid epidemic. What if we offered them material improvements without trying to guilt them and continuing to run campaigns based almost entirely around culture war that they view as an attack on them? Is punishing them really more important than laying the groundwork for solidarity?

 

Uhhh . . . almost everyone here is for pretty strong progressive policies that would only help these people. We continue to fight for that, indeed, we have to fight against them because they are stupid and brain washed to get them the policies that'll actually help them. So where is the punishment? We're fighting for them, as far as I see it. But it is impossible to find any solidarity. That is entirely off the table. The material improvements will come for them regardless of how hard they try to stop us. But we don't need their fucking consent anymore.

 

But they want to be contrarian and be the enemy. But of course while we help them they deserve our derision. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

[run32.dll]

18 minutes ago, legend said:

 

I'm not sure I agree with him ignoring them. He's made a lot of efforts to go out to rural areas in his campaign and tried to talk about the issues that they are facing, especially during this pandemic. As I said, we can always indefinitely raise the bar, but it's not ignoring them. I am glad to hear you don't think he's antagonizing them though.

 

As far as the polices not being being materially different I vastly disagree. Trump's mishandling of the pandemic, his efforts to dismantle health care in general, and his stupid trade war with China has absolutely impacted rural communities. Trump very clearly cares about his bottom line and since his supports mind boggling support him while he literally leaves them out in the cold means he'll continue to do that.

The material policies are minor. What is Biden really going to do different about the pandemic? He's already backed off even having a national mask mandate and instead said he would just strongly encourage governors to do it. He's not going to do a national lock down or force one on states that are doing poorly. To be fair, I'm not giving him the benefit of doubt on some of his claims such as that he'll give more federal aid at a level that actually matters. However he's also spent nearly his entire career being a hatchet man for the usury industry so why would I or anyone else take that seriously compared to his actual record as a senator and vice president? Even if I were to believe what he's saying, capitalism is accelerating to its inevitable death. The neoliberal era is knocking on death's door. What does he really offer that's substantially different? He rejects Medicare For All. He's proud to not support the Green New Deal. He's proud to not be a social democrat and to stand in the way of social democracy. He's an obstruction to the last "left" answer that protects capital. How does he stop the progression towards neo-feudalism or fascism?

Edit: I also forgot to mention that he's also slammed Trump for being too soft on Cuba and Venezuela and has signaled he wants to return to the same foreign policy approach that helped Bolsanaro in Brazil. He's going to actively fight against over sovereign countries' leftist governments.
 

18 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Uhhh . . . almost everyone here is for pretty strong progressive policies that would only help these people. We continue to fight for that, indeed, we have to fight against them because they are stupid and brain washed to get them the policies that'll actually help them. So where is the punishment? We're fighting for them, as far as I see it. 

 

But they want to be contrarian and the enemy. But of course while we help them they deserve our derision. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Yet here we are talking about how these dumb hicks can go fuck themselves.

[Ominous]

It's hard to have sympathy for people that are against basic human rights. 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

I'm going sound like a broken record, but I don't care.

 

I am all-but-convinced that the GOP will produce a candidate in the future that will drop the racism, venture into heavily Latin-American and African-American areas and actually pay attention to their material needs in a way that no Republican has since...ever, and because those communities are still VERY MUCH socially-conservative, will demolish whatever milquetoast centrist the Democrats trot out.

 

 

[legend]

10 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

The material policies are minor. What is Biden really going to do different about the pandemic? He's already backed off even having a national mask mandate and instead said he would just strongly encourage governors to do it. He's not going to do a national lock down or force one on states that are doing poorly. To be fair, I'm not giving him the benefit of doubt on some of his claims such as that he'll give more federal aid at a level that actually matters. However he's also spent nearly his entire career being a hatchet man for the usury industry so why would I or anyone else take that seriously compared to his actual record as a senator and vice president? Even if I were to believe what he's saying. Capitalism is accelerating to its inevitable death. The neoliberal era is knocking on death's door. What does he really offer that's substantially different? He rejects Medicare For All. He's proud to not support the Green New Deal. He's proud to not be a social democrat and to stand in the way of social democracy. He's an obstruction to the last "left" answer that protects capital. How does he stop the progression towards neo-feudalism or fascism?

 

Having health care dismantled is not minor, let alone comparing that with Biden who is trying to implement a public option for people who don't have good options from work!  (Especially now with so many who have lost their jobs.) Providing financial support at the individual, small business, and school level is not minor! Feeding a perception that it's no big deal and the big bad dems are just out to get you is profoundly counter productive. Throwing out the group for handling pandemics was not fucking productive.

 

Look, covid wouldn't have been nothing if someone else was president during this year. It would still suck. But it could have sucked less with someone competent. Taking this defeatist stance that there was nothing we could do is one of the worst fucking things we can do. We should be taking lessons for how to handle this in the future because it *will* happen again and there are things we could have done *much* better.

[run32.dll]

1 minute ago, legend said:

 

Having health care dismantled is not minor, let alone comparing that with Biden who is trying to implement a public option for people who don't have good options from work!  (Especially now with so many who have lost their jobs.) Providing financial support at the individual, small business, and school level is not minor! Feeding a perception that it's no big deal and the big bad dems are just out to get you is profoundly counter productive. Throwing out the group for handling pandemics was not fucking productive.

 

Look, covid wouldn't have been nothing if someone else was president during this year. It would still suck. But it could have sucked less with someone competent. Taking this defeatist stance that there was nothing we could do is one of the worst fucking thing we can do. If anything we should be taking lessons for how to handle this in the future because it *will* happen again and there are things we could have done *much* better.

I just severely doubt his sincerity based on his record and the actions of previous adherents of his ideology. His own party is going to fight against the public option just like they did when we instead got the Heritage Foundation's healthcare plan. For one thing, if your goal is the public option you can't start with that as your negotiating position. Merely keeping the ACA with some meager Medicaid expansion and lowering the age for Medicare here we come.

[Greatoneshere]

14 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

Yet here we are talking about how these dumb hicks can go fuck themselves.

 

As I said, both can be true at the same time. I can hate this group on a personal level, and have good reason to do so. But I can also materially fight for the right policies that will help the most people, them included. 

 

They are dumb hicks who can go fuck themselves. But they're still humans I want to help lift up, educate, etc. Doesn't mean I have to enjoy doing it since they make it so fucking hard for me to do. These are not contradictory positions, so what's the issue?

 

5 minutes ago, Emperor Diocletian II said:

I'm going sound like a broken record, but I don't care.

 

I am all-but-convinced that the GOP will produce a candidate in the future that will drop the racism, venture into heavily Latin-American and African-American areas and actually pay attention to their material needs in a way that no Republican has since...ever, and because those communities are still VERY MUCH socially-conservative, will demolish whatever milquetoast centrist the Democrats trot out.

 

 

I agree - guess we better get moving now on educating them on social issues and making the Democratic position more appealing before its too late.

[legend]

1 minute ago, run32.dll said:

I just severely doubt his sincerity based on his record and the actions of previous adherents of his ideology. His own party is going to fight against the public option just like they did when we instead got the Heritage Foundation's healthcare plan. For one thing, if your goal is the public option you can't start with that as your negotiating position. Merely keeping the ACA with some meager Medicaid expansion and lowering the age for Medicare here we come.

 

Hey, I want M4A too! Biden's not my top pick. But if you don't think there are serious effectual differences between him and Trump, you're quite frankly insane! I seriously cannot begin to understand how you went through these last 4 years thinking this is just business as usual.

[Greatoneshere]

2 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

I just severely doubt his sincerity based on his record and the actions of previous adherents of his ideology. His own party is going to fight against the public option just like they did when we instead got the Heritage Foundation's healthcare plan. For one thing, if your goal is the public option you can't start with that as your negotiating position. Merely keeping the ACA with some meager Medicaid expansion and lowering the age for Medicare here we come.

 

You can be as cynical as you like, it's still a significant step up from Trump, and I'm not even a Biden fan. The suggestion you're making that there aren't serious effectual differences between them sounds pretty fucking crazy, sorry. I have religiously followed the news for the past 4 years and in no way is that a conclusion I could come to. Trump's incompetence alone (vs. Biden's competence) creates serious effectual differences by itself.

[Firewithin]

7 minutes ago, Emperor Diocletian II said:

 

 

I am all-but-convinced that the GOP will produce a candidate in the future that will drop the racism.

 

 

 

You lost me here

[run32.dll]

8 minutes ago, legend said:

 

Hey, I want M4A too! Biden's not my top pick. But if you don't think there are serious effectual differences between him and Trump, you're quite frankly insane! I seriously cannot begin to understand how you went through these last 4 years thinking this is just business as usual.

We did a coup to remove the popular democratically elected leader of another country because they weren't allowing our companies or trading partners to privatize their natural resources while wealth concentration continued to accelerate back home. Pretty much business as usual other than failing to start a war. He's shifted our federal courts to the right for decades to come but Biden doesn't want to do anything about it. I'll acknowledge Biden is a minute harm reduction. I'm never going to congratulate or reward him and I'm not going to stop criticizing him. He's a bad candidate that won't do anywhere near enough and there's barely any time left on the clock.

[Greatoneshere]

2 minutes ago, run32.dll said:

We did a coup to remove the popular democratically elected leader of another country because they weren't allowing our companies or trading partners to privatize their natural resources while wealth continued to accelerate back home. Pretty much business as usual other than failing to start a war. He's shifted our federal courts to the right for decades to come but Biden doesn't want to do anything about it. I'll acknowledge Biden is a minute harm reduction. I'm never going to congratulate or reward him and I'm not going to stop criticizing him. He's a bad candidate that won't do anywhere near enough and there's barely any time left on the clock.

 

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Or in this case, the enemy of "we get to live not having to worry about Trump every fucking day".

 

We all know Biden is a pyrrhic victory bru. But we'll deal with Biden on Jan 20th and we'll have 4 years to attack his corporate Democratic position. If he makes Bernie labor secretary that's something! He keeps saying he wants a Roosevelt-esque administration. We'll see.

 

Biden is a bad candidate, and not my pick for president (I still voted Biden because duh). But uh . . . it's not a net loss.

[legend]

1 minute ago, run32.dll said:

We did a coup to remove the popular democratically elected leader of another country because they weren't allowing our companies or trading partners to privatize their natural resources while wealth continued to accelerate back home. Pretty much business as usual other than failing to start a war. He's shifted our federal courts to the right for decades to come but Biden doesn't want to do anything about it. I'll acknowledge Biden is a minute harm reduction. I'm never going to congratulate or reward him and I'm not going to stop criticizing him. He's a bad candidate that won't do anywhere near enough and there's barely any time left on the clock.

 

I'm not asking you to reward or praise Biden. You don't need to champion him as some great progressive. He's not.

 

I am asking, or at least hoping, that you can still maintain the perspective that he is significantly better for the country than Trump in meaningful ways. And yes, even for poorer rural people, if not them in particular.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

The clock has run out.

 

We're in full-on "harm mitigation" mode now.

[Greatoneshere]

2 minutes ago, legend said:

 

I'm not asking you to reward or praise Biden. You don't need to champion him as some great progressive. He's not.

 

I am asking, or at least hoping, that you can still maintain the perspective that he is significantly better for the country than Trump in meaningful ways. And yes, even for poorer rural people, if not them in particular.

 

Yes, this, exactly. Biden is not a progressive, but he is still very much meaningfully different than Trump. Honestly, that's not saying much, but it remains true regardless.

[Jason]

13 minutes ago, Emperor Diocletian II said:

The clock has run out.

 

We're in full-on "harm mitigation" mode now.

 

NYC has already officially been reclassified from being like New England to being like the southeast. 

[CayceG]

So I've read every post on in the first two pages of the thread so far. I've wanted to opine on this all day and haven't had a chance. Here's a few things I noticed. 

 

First up, Fizzzle's generally right with his initial thing. Dems have all but written off rural America except for 12 months every 4 years. The first page of this thread has a lot of really not good shit about actively writing off rednecks and deplorables and whatever. Yes, a lot are racist and bigoted and hateful and those things should be written off. But a lot of them do indeed have material needs that are not being met. And they deserve to be met. Greatoneshere's takes are pretty awful. 

 

I wanted to look at something Keyser said:

15 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

A democratic president may not mention them but will help them.

A republican president will mention them, exploit them for their vote and not help them.

 

 

This isn't true. 

It isn't that the Dems' policies aren't beneficial to people. But they aren't the most helpful and a lot of times, they're too wonky and technocratic to make a noticeable difference in peoples' lives. Do we not remember all of the shit from 4-6 years ago about having coal miners learn to code? That's not going to do it. Block grants for underprivileged areas of the country isn't going to affect peoples' daily lives. 

 

Dems by and large don't want to END the opioid epidemic. Dems don't by and large want to SOLVE massive wealth inequality. Dems don't want to end the Forever War.

Dems will tweak regulations to restrict pharmacies or rejigger the personal income tax rates but not touch the corporate rates or talk about troop reductions but still order drone strikes in Yemen.

 

Dems don't want to give your Meemaw healthcare. They just want to make sure she has access to it. 

Dems don't want to give your unemployed uncle on disability a job or a stipend or better benefits. They want to make sure he has the benefits but only if he can jump through the right hoops. 

 

Now, are all of these things consequences of compromise with awful Republicans who was NONE of these things? Yes. But they wouldn't have to be if the Dems actually campaigned on these things. 

 

 

Flyover country, middle America, rednecks... whatever you want to call it have been looked down upon as dumber, less able, and not worthy of focus by the Dems. 

On NPR this morning I heard one of these types get interviewed and he basically said "the Dems ignore me. Trump may be using me, but he cares enough to at least pretend I exist."

 

---

 

Like CNut and others have said, though, I do agree that not all the concerns need to be addressed. For all the shit the Dems don't do, they DO pick good fights in social areas. Gay marriage, abortion access, and so on. These are objectively issues that people we've been talking about--including my own mother--would be extremely turned off by. 

 

But that doesn't mean their material issues that would be served through public goods that are benefits to society at large aren't worth it. And it doesn't mean that they don't deserve to be reached out to on those grounds. 

 

---

 

The biggest question is how we got here. I think a lot ties into the mindset and beliefs of individualism and capitalism being the canards that lead people down those paths that ultimately don't serve their interests. Add to that things like NAFTA and the scattering of industry, and you have a ton of towns that may have had something before now not having anything at all. And this comes from Republicans and Democrats. 

 

Republican pushes for reductions in public spending do the same thing to the poor. It hits rural and urban poor in the same ways, but the urban poor maybe have it better off just by virtue of existing in a place that has a higher concentration of services. When Tennessee has all these rural hospitals shut down, and strip mall minute clinics are popping up instead, the message IS "you don't matter enough to have this service." It doesn't matter if it's a private or public entity that's saying it. It's seen the same: they're being ignored. 

 

---

 

But also Skillzdadirecta is, once again, 100% correct. 

11 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

I don't know how old you are but most of rural America was Democrat until the late 60's. You know what flipped them to Republicanism? THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Look up "The Southern Strategy" and then come back. Racism was a KEY factor in flipping white rural voters. Rich Whites have exploited Poor Whites since this Country's founding by treating them slightly better than Blacks, Native Americans, Hispanics and even other "White" immigrants like The Irish and Italians by telling them that THESE groups are responsible for their lot in life and they fall for it EVERYTIME. How else could a rich northern elitist reality TV star EVER appeal to groups of people that he would never be caught dead hanging around. He's playing by the old playbook.

 

White working class Americans ROUTINELY vote against their own interests because as long as you appeal to their since of grieviance and victimhood that will "Trump" any other concern. Explain to me how working class, rank and file union workers could EVER support a Republican President... that makes absolutely no sense. It would almost be like a gay person voting for a hardcore evangelical expecting that candidate to have their best interests at heart.

 

Any of what I've said before will not work on people he's describing. The ones that have been poisoned by Facebook conspiracies, Fox News, and fed lines about The Other that are responsible for their plight--not the politicians and business owners that should really be in the crosshairs. (not a metaphor)

 

For a lot of people, the dark heart in the center of their soul will always be what drives them and what can be fed in order to gain their loyalty. For Trump and Nixon it was the darkness of racism. For Bush and Reagan it was the darkness of geed and selfishness. Those things will always win out for those specific people over material circumstances like having free healthcare or paid for college or available jobs supported by a government that wants to facilitate moving to a better future. 

 

But for some people--the ones I mainly focused on in the beginning of my post--that can work. 

 

 

At the end of the day, no matter what, we shouldn't stop wanting better things for everyone--even the people that hate us. No one is beyond redemption. Everyone deserves the basics in life like housing, a livable wage, education, and healthcare. And if people are going to be racist and be more inclined to support a fascist movement that promises to give them those things at the expense of other people, then they deserve a bullet in addition to all those other things. 

 

[Greatoneshere]

7 minutes ago, CayceG said:

But a lot of them do indeed have material needs that are not being met. And they deserve to be met. Greatoneshere's takes are pretty awful. 

 

 

How are my takes awful? I'm fighting for their needs better than they are but somehow I'm the bad guy? I can loathe and hate a group (rightfully so, in this case) and help them at the same time. They actively don't help themselves, but my takes are the problem? I've done more for them politically with my votes throughout the years than they've done for themselves with theirs.

[CayceG]

2 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

How are my takes awful? I'm fighting for their needs better than they are but somehow I'm the bad guy? I can loathe and hate a group (rightfully so, in this case) and help them at the same time. They actively don't help themselves, but my takes are the problem?

 

If you read the rest of my post you will see that I do indeed point out the problems. You're just being reactionary and hateful--and gleefully so. 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

The "Democratic Party" is an unwieldly fiction that only really exists in a form that defines itself as "Not Republicans".

 

This absolutely not a sustainable basis when staring into the maw of the multiple crises this society faces.

[Greatoneshere]

11 minutes ago, CayceG said:

 

If you read the rest of my post you will see that I do indeed point out the problems. You're just being reactionary and hateful--and gleefully so. 

 

I did read the post, it made sense, I knew all that but how am I being reactionary and hateful in any unjustified way? The gleefulness is for catharsis, but it doesn't make me any less wrong about the nature of this group's character.

 

They gleefully kill us (and want to) but me gleefully, justifiably describing why we should continue to demonize demons makes no sense?

 

They worked hard for my gleeful, hateful, reactionary attitude. They earned it with four years of endless news. They should be thankful I'm an aggressive progressive who will try to help them anyway rather than turn on them like they clearly want because I still consider myself a moral human being, unlike them and the policies they vote for, peddle, and believe in.

 

They earned every post I wrote in this thread. As if I like being this way. They made the monster.

[CayceG]

Just now, Emperor Diocletian II said:

The "Democratic Party" is an unwieldly fiction that only really exists in a form that defines itself as "Not Republicans".

 

This absolutely not a sustainable basis when staring into the maw of the multiple crises this society faces.

 

Precisely. 

 

And the Right has coalesced behind hero worship, monarchy, and Fascism enough such that there's no way they split if the Dems do. 

 

 

[Ominous]

51 minutes ago, Emperor Diocletian II said:

I'm going sound like a broken record, but I don't care.

 

I am all-but-convinced that the GOP will produce a candidate in the future that will drop the racism, venture into heavily Latin-American and African-American areas and actually pay attention to their material needs in a way that no Republican has since...ever, and because those communities are still VERY MUCH socially-conservative, will demolish whatever milquetoast centrist the Democrats trot out.

 

 

Yep. The white conservatives will realize that there are plenty of tan and dark people that hate women and the gays even more than they do. 

[legend]

16 minutes ago, CayceG said:

Dems don't want to give your Meemaw healthcare. They just want to make sure she has access to it. 

Dems don't want to give your unemployed uncle on disability a job or a stipend or better benefits. They want to make sure he has the benefits but only if he can jump through the right hoops. 

 

Now, are all of these things consequences of compromise with awful Republicans who was NONE of these things? Yes. But they wouldn't have to be if the Dems actually campaigned on these things. 

 

 

There are dems who actually want to give those things... But Biden's absolutely far less ambitious than other democrats goals, so lets go ahead and focus on that. It sounds like you're saying "yes the republican's won't even go that far," which sounds like a concession that, yes, democrats would be better for rural America. At which point I think you just argued the counter point.

 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

At this point, I will honestly say that the optimal outcome is the (relatively peaceful) dissolution of the United States or its reformation into a "confederation" rather than a "federation".

 

The country is simply too large and too diverse (politically, socially, economically) for it to effectively tackle this "Age of Crisis".

[Jason]

2 minutes ago, Emperor Diocletian II said:

At this point, I will honestly say that the optimal outcome is the (relatively peaceful) dissolution of the United States or its reformation into a "confederation" rather than a "federation".

 

The country is simply too large and too diverse (politically, socially, economically) for it to effectively tackle this "Age of Crisis".

 

That doesn't solve the problem that the underlying issue here is the urban/rural divide.

[CayceG]

2 minutes ago, legend said:

 

 

There are dems who actually want to give those things... But Biden's absolutely far less ambitious than other democrats goals, so lets go ahead and focus on that. It sounds like you're saying "yes the republican's won't even go that far," which sounds like a concession that, yes, democrats would be better for rural America. At which point I think you just argued the counter point.

 

 

Not the majority and not in the direct way that has the most impact. 

 

What I mean to get at there is exemplified by the Affordable Care Act. My mom worked (and still does) at a small pharmacy run by a greedy miser that doesn't pay his employees well. My mom had to buy expensive insurance before. After the ACA became law, it got more expensive and if she didn't buy it she--a woman in her 50s--would go without... AND pay a tax for it. I've talked with her about this and we BOTH agree that it should just be free and available. 

 

The Democratic policies the majority of the party push don't want to pass a straight Medicare For All bill to do that. It's always about wonkery. Look at Liz Warren's 6 year plan to institute M4A that hinged on this convoluted incrementalist roadmap! 

 

The Dems gaining power and instituting their actual party policies would not appreciably affect lives like my mom's. Because their policies aren't good enough. They don't go far enough. And they are never conceived to solve the heart of any issue. 

 

Does that mean I'm against them? No. I punched one in for Biden--and for the progressive, black single mother running for Lamar Alexander's seat against a Trump-backed Republican. But that just means that it's a constant fight to get what we want: a better country for everyone.