256
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 72 points 8 months ago

In two ways. They also killed the chances of further good deals. When they aren’t in power why would democrats ever want to negotiate with them

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 37 points 8 months ago

Because democrats are willing to do their jobs.

[-] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

And here I thought Democrats even participating in a BS, "bipartisan" bill that only served to validate the xenophobia being put forth by the opposing party was appalling and a clear example of the utter failure they represent.

Then again, illegals is common vernacular now, so what the fuck do I even know, really.

I've voted for Dems my entire life, but you'll never catch me saying they "do their jobs". The party embarrasses me at nearly every opportunity; any support I have for/give to the party is despite its leadership, not because of it.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

Willing, and capable are different. They are politicians after all.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Rolling over for republicans is in their job descriptipn?!

... that explains a few things...

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 7 points 8 months ago

When politics function correctly, that is what they are supposed to do in order to get concessions on other important things. Compromise leaves everyone unsatisfied.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Compromise is supposed to come with consessions from BOTH sides, not just handing one side everything they actually want after they make an unreasonable request...

That's capitulation, not negotiation.

[-] Vorticity@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

That's what the democrats were trying to do. Republicans tied funding for Ukraine and some other things to tightening border security. The democrats called their bluff. They said "Here's a border security bill that does what you've been asking for now let's get this all done". Republicans' made surprised Pikachu face and said "We didn't want it this way! We want it done by OUR president so he gets credit!" So, even though the Democrats were giving the Republicans what they've been asking for in exchange for things the Democrats wanted, the Republicans said "no".

[-] Wiz@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago

Republicans never argue in good faith, and they always put power and politics over policy.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

"That's what they were doing! Republicans made a dishonest and completely unneccessary move, and Democrats compromised with that unreasonable position!"

Yes... exactly. Democrats GIVE IN TO BAD FAITH DEMANDS. That is NOT negotiating. That is capitulating.

[-] Vorticity@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

I don't think you really read my comment. Here's my summation of how the back and forth went:

Dems: We want funding for Ukraine.

Reps: We want border security. No funding for Ukraine without border security!

Dems: Okay! Let's do both!

Reps: Wait! We didn't really mean it!

The Dems called the Reps bluff and the Reps backed out. The Dems were getting something they wanted in the deal, too. Plus, Dems seem to be warming to the idea of border security more recently so they're not exactly getting nothing from that part either.

That doesn't sound like giving in to bad faith demands. That sounds like negotiating. It's just that the Reps aren't actually interested in negotiating and flipped the table over even though they were getting a pretty good deal. It shows the Reps as the selfish babies that they are while the Dems show willingness to actually get things done.

[-] alilbee@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Oh yeah, they should do what the Republicans are doing and use a scorched earth, no compromise strategy! I mean, geez, look at all these huge legislative wins accomplished by this congress using this strategy. Maybe we can even have a cool purity-test driven speaker role, that's been working well for them! Anything else we should imitate that I'm forgetting? A demagogic, unrestrained president would definitely tie things up nicely.

Okay I'll stop being a sarcastic jerk now, but you get the point. This strategy from Republicans works wonders when it comes to obstructing and shutting things down, but you're never going to build anything with it. It's destructive at its core.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

Notice how I am distinctly not asking for Democrats to become as obstructionist. I'm saying they should act like adults dealing with unreasonable people.

[-] alilbee@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

If you act as if you have leverage you don't and refuse to engage with those who have power, your only choice is obstruction. This is what the Republicans are learning right this moment. Now, lucky for them, obstruction happens to coincide pretty well with their political objectives. For anything "constructive" though, they fail time and time again because none of them know how to compromise.

Politics is compromising with factions to achieve your goals. I loathe some of the things we have to compromise on, but these people exist and they will have representation in our government for as long as they do.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

They do not deserve representatives that cannot uphold their oath of office just because they also think that way

We do not let murderers write the laws on murder, yet people CONSTANTLY excuse Congress for being illegally vile...

What the fuck is wrong with everyone? Neither party's behavior is acceptable REGARDLESS of how large the gulf between them is.

Note how I have never once said to not vote for dems over repubs. I just want people to realize you are not working with quality. You CANNOT expect dems to do the right thing on their own. Ever. They require constant pressure to the left, or they DO get dragged to the right.

This played out in real time and people EXCUSE the risk. The risk vs reward is pathetically small for gheir gamble. This was NOT a smart move even IF it worked out, and it's literal insanity to sit here and listen to buffoons defend a terrible decision that moves the Overton window to rhe right.

Yet again, people are cheering the Dems allowing the Overton window to slip to the right... Pathetic. Beyond pathetic. It will be the death of this country.

[-] alilbee@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

You talk about "acceptable" and "deserving" but you have to realize that power is the only thing that matters in the end. They get power, they enact their whims. They don't, they can't. Right now, they have it, so you have to negotiate. That's it, that's just how it works.

People who complain about the Overton window are wasting their time. You don't get to control that. Focus on winning what is possible with the window you have to work in. Expand that window if and when you can. Refusing to participate until the window looks like what you want it to is just ineffective.

And I just don't agree with your characterization of the dems. I have my problems with their direction or actions at times, but they've fought and won for my rights and for the rights of various others in my lifetime. I do consider the more leftist parts of the party to be allies, but I'm not willing to give complete credit for those victories to only that wing of the party. I think it's really disingenuous to look at the victories won for LGBT rights, climate change, and healthcare in the last 20 years (incomplete as they may be), and just write off the work done by democrats to achieve those.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

No, that's the thing... we DO control the Overton window. Demovrats could easily stand their ground and keep it somewhere. They choose not to.

How much leftist progress came about because of Bernie and AOC simply being a voice of the left??

This shit matters, and Democrats CONSTANTLY shirk responsibility.

[-] alilbee@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Listen, spend your time shaking your fist at the democrats and ignoring the realities of politics all you like, but it's not pragmatic. Again, I have my complaints, but overall I'm pleased with the way that democrats have operated recently. AOC is even a Democrat! It's a big party with a lot of viewpoints, but has a throughline of empathy, minority rights, and democracy. There have been wins that have personally affected me in massive ways, almost entirely won by democrats.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

"Ignoring the reality of politics"

Ahh yes, you enlightened centrist, please tell me how CONSTANTLY letting dishonest actors be treated as if they are not dishonest helps anything?

The people denying reality are those like you. We NEED better than Democrats.

Stop creating excuses for them.

[-] alilbee@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

I'm not much of a centrist really. I guess maybe on the global scale, but I'm a pretty average socdem. I'm not creating excuses for them at all. I'm mostly happy with what Democrats have accomplished and warded off for me and the country in my lifetime, so there's nothing for me to excuse. There's always room to grow and improve, for sure, but expecting perfection and my entire wishlist is ignoring those pesky real world obstacles again.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

If you're happy with the Dems, you're not paying attention. While global warming ramps up, they ask for a slow transition to NATURAL GAS. Democrats do that for all topics. They are feet draggers and excuse makers.

Yes, that's better than the cartoon villains of the Republicans... but if you're happy to be represented by useful idiots... you're not paying attention.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Clent@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

No, but Republicans convincing you it is, is the primary requirement in a Republican's job description.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Why do the Democrats let Republicans write their job description? They should negotiate, not capitulate. I know that's a difficult distinction these days given how much of the latter has been going on, but wake up and realize the difference.

[-] Clent@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

They don't. You are letting Republicans write it and dismissing reality. You are their tool. A useful idiot. The poorly educated.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

You are beyond pathetic if you think I support Republicans.

I'm pointing out that Democrats CONSTANTLY allow the Overton window to move to the right. They do these "compromises" that only offer legitimacy to the OUTRIGHT LIES of Republicans.

Democrats are the useful idiots, and you morons are here seal-clapping as the Dems give creedence to the Republican version of "border crisis".

There is no border crisis. Not a NEW one, anyways... and now you have Democrats screaming, "give me the power, I'll shut down the border today!"

You all are pathetic for failing to see who the actual useful idios are.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Please explain your grand strategy for passing meaningful legislation while the GOP controls a house of Congress. How exactly do Democrats pass aid to Ukraine?

You know how you move the Overton window back? Remove conservatives from Congress. You do that by winning elections. And you don't do that by SOLEY denigrating the only party we can actually capture and use to our advantage. You aren't helping the cause you supposedly support. You're just doing damage, not offering a single workable alternative solution, and throwing a temper tantrum. Saying "Democrats bad" over and over, while again not offering any real criticism of the GOP or a better solution, is precisely what a Republican would do.

Moderates control the party because they made specific strategic decisions to capture, grow, and maintain that power over many elections. We have to do the EXACT. SAME. THING. If you aren't willing to support that, just admit you'd rather have moderates or conservatives in charge.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Ahh yes, the classic, "please present a perfect solution if you want to complain about something."

Pathetic is the correct word for you. Stop making excuses for people that aren't even trying. You talk as if Republicans have all the power... and they do. Because Democrats fundamentally do not know how to use it.

Keep cheering on losers, though. It seems to be what this country loves on both sides of the aisle...

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

You can't even provide a single solution or explain why mine is flawed. You're acting as though every single elected Democrat is some moderate incapable of correctly welding power. That's nonsense. I'm talking about getting rid of those that aren't working on our behalf and you want to cry like a child to make yourself feel good and get attention.

[-] clayh@lemmy.ml 0 points 8 months ago

Did you just learn the word capitulate or something?

You’re suffocating all the discussion in this thread by making that “point” to anyone who replies.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

Notice how no one is disagreeing with an actual point that means anything against what I said. Including yours. Good job failing to listen or think.

[-] clayh@lemmy.ml -1 points 8 months ago

Nobody is disagreeing because nobody wants to interact with the guy who immediately replies to every comment in the thread, especially when it’s a 12 year old that just learned a new word.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 24 points 8 months ago

The last time they had a majority (first mandate of Obama if I recall?) they tried to work with the Republicans in good faith and they got nowhere so fast that the public voted them out from dissatisfaction.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I remember it.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 8 months ago

The health care bill contained a series of things that are broadly popular when they were laid out individually. Package them together and call it "Obamacare" in the media and it was suddenly unpopular.

Tea Party astroturfing can't be understated, either. The GOP grabbed back power at just the right time to be able to gerrymander districts and then keep them gerrymandered up until now. We're only beginning to erode that back.

[-] ultranaut@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

It was a one person majority in the Senate that only lasted for a brief amount of time and was gone once healthcare reform ate up all of the time before Ted Kennedy died. They basically took what Mitt Romney had done at the state level and applied it federally, which is what Republicans claimed to want before they decided to call it Obamacare and pretend they didn't help craft it.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

Because you need 60 votes to do anything in the Senate.

[-] admiralteal@kbin.social 18 points 8 months ago

Only until the instant the Senate takes a simple majority vote to lower it to 50.

While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP, it's also a matter of fact that it is an antidemocratic institution that in the longer term we're better off minimizing or eliminating. It's the House of Lords and we do not need a House of Lords in the modern era.

Though I would like to see proper reapportionment in the House of Reps first, including adding significantly more members.

[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 7 points 8 months ago

While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP

Has it?

[-] admiralteal@kbin.social -1 points 8 months ago

Maybe. Maybe not. I won't come to the defense of that, it was more of a hedge.

[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 0 points 8 months ago

The argument works for the House of Lords, which has often acted as a moderating force (and loses power every time it does), despite its antidemocratic nature.

I think it's a non-starter for the Senate. It was deliberately constructed as a conservative brake on Congress, being heavily weighted to smaller (more rural) states which tend to be more conservative. True conservatism is obviously opposed to fascism but in practice, it isn't (and neither is liberalism if it is feeling threatened by socialism).

[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago

But muh states rights!

[-] Tremble@sh.itjust.works 9 points 8 months ago

Because corporate dems are basically republicans. Our whole political system is right of center. With a few outliers.

[-] xenomor@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Have you ever listened to Democrats? The leadership keeps saying that they believe we need a strong Republican Party for some reason.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 4 points 8 months ago

Imagine the soundbites if they said they wanted to destroy the opposition party.

[-] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

The GOP had a sign that said "we are domestic terrorists." Can we stop caring what these radicalized disruptors think? Anyone who claims to be a moderate at this point is not welcome in my house none the less would I want to be on the same side as them.

[-] BakerBagel@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago

GOP talking heads say the same thing all the time

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

For better or worse we have a two dominant party system, which totally breaks down when one party decides to go it alone and only advance causes they can win with their votes.

That is a weak party, so divided internally they don't dare compromise externally.

If we don't have at LEAST two functional parties, it all falls apart.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

That sounds like an utterly stupid system that is fragile and easily manipulated... Go figure it's ours...

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

I'm not arguing with that, but it's the system we have. We can modify it, improve upon it, or let it completely fall apart and be replaced with One Party Rule.

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

They say this because their lobbyists want nothing to change and if the Republicans are too weak, Democrats may actually have to make peoples lives better or the whole charade falls apart.

this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
256 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19082 readers
3710 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS