290
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
290 points (83.9% liked)
politics
19248 readers
2146 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Regardless of Fetterman's ideology or any stated or perceived shift, he's a pragmatist and straight-shooter above everything else. He was that way long before the stroke. The fact that a lifetime grifter and department store rapist with 91 felony indictment counts has a good chance of winning the election is absurd. A bag of rocks running against Trump should win. Biden and the Democrats are in a very weak position, but it's clear that Biden is the chosen candidate. It makes no sense at this point to have Democrats amplifying GOP talking points, unless they're in any position of power with the DNC to change what is inevitable right now with the Democratic nomination.
I'm in PA and I doubt his progressiveness got him elected. Anyone with a D after their name carries Philly and Pittsburgh by default. Fetterman's no nonsense approach and the fact that the working class can relate to him got votes in Pennsyltuckey, a segment the Democrats have been losing over the years. Democrats should be in a lab right now trying to figure out how to clone Fetterman.
I'm sure I'll be labeled a Fetterman fan boy, but I'm a 50-something 30+ year Democrat that has seen Democrats do a really good job at losing elections and letting the GOP walk all over them. Fetterman no doubt has a cult-like following, but the DNC powers that be should be examining why that is.
That's a bunch of horse shit. Self criticism is the only thing keeping Democrats from becoming a clone of the GOP.
Anyone telling me I can't participate in discourse involving totally valid criticisms about any politician can go kick rocks.
Also, how is discussing his drastic turn towards conservative politics "amplifying GOP talking points"?
Ahh yeah, America surely needs more brain damages politicians advocating for genocide...
Maybe because your generations idea of a progressive is John Fetterman? Maybe because Democrats have just become the GOP from the 90s, and thats not typically what actual progressives want?
I'm not sure if that's still true. Fetterman had a cult like following because he primarily ran on labour, something he was actually progressive about. I don't think it's super common to be progressive on labour but an insane reactionary when if comes to everything else.
Sometimes I wonder if people on this platform were born yesterday.
What in flying fuck are you smoking. What policies or legislation overlaps between these two? One is ending school lunches for starving children and the other is trying to push progressive policies. Why, oh why, do you guys keep repeating this insane, asinine, talking point like it's gospel. Please, for all the love that is holy, tell us where the legislature of the Democrats mirrors the GOP in Any. Fucking. Form.
I await with bated breath.
I didn't say don't vote for them...... What do you think keeps Democrats sliding further and further right? It's not the leadership, it's their constituents screaming at them when they step out of line.
The reason the GOP has become hostage to someone like Trump and the freedom caucus is because people within their own aren't allowed to criticize them.
Off the top of my head, the Patriot act, the Iraq war resolution, DMCA, SOPA, KOPA, support for israel's genocide, Japanese American interment in WW2, and the Gulf of tomkin resolution. Only some of the most dangerous policies in this nations history, no big whoop.
I like that we have to go back in time long before the southern strategy as if the Dems are a monolithic body. Just from a cursory first glance on Patriot act:
I won't argue on SOPA because that is indeed contentious, but going back in time like that is really disingenuous.
I answered your question accurately. Instead of moving the goalposts after the fact, maybe you should ask a different question to begin with.
No goalposts were moved. You lied. Quick ten second Google search proved you wrong. You equivocated between the two as if they are both lock step voting the same on all legislation. Not only that, but you had to go back to W W 2 , long before the southern strategy was effected to back your claim.
I did no such thing. You asked when they ever agree, implying that they never do, and I gave several examples of them agreeing on some pretty bad legislation. Maybe you're confusing me with someone else. This was our first interaction.
No I didn't. SOPA and the DMCA were a few years ago. Patriot act gets renewed every few years with bipartisan support. KOPA is brand new. You're latching onto the oldest example I gave because it fits your narrative and ignoring the others. Stop that. It makes you look like a dipshit.
I misspoke. It's expected that some bills will pass with bilateral support. It would be crazy if that never happened. The issue is the Dems are a big tent with many contrasting perspectives. The Gop is lockstep on almost every bill (except lately they are starting to fracture). What I was aiming to express is that overall, if I was to compare every bill pushed forward by the Democrats compared to their Gop counterparts, it would paint a very clear picture of where they diverge policy wise. That's all.
The reason why the GOP is always lockstep is because they don't allow self criticism within their party. This makes them legislatively powerful, but it also makes them prone to fascism.
The reason we have to allow self criticism within the democratic party is because it is a big tent party. Without allowing politically disadvantaged groups within the party to point out its internal contradictions, the progressiveness party will stagnate. Instead its leadership will be consolidated with those who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Namely the older members whose idea of political progress is stuck the 90's.
Everything you said is correct. I don't mind criticism within the Democratic party if its constituents actually showed up to vote (in local or federal elections). The other side shows up regardless who's on the ballot, as proven by the current frontrunner for the Gop. Meanwhile, Dems have to hold their noses tell each other how they'll sit this one out because Biden is just not radical enough as the Trump's cabinet guts the EPA and demolishes every institution and value. In four years Trump's cabinet stacked almost all the lower circuit courts with republican judges. All these downstream effects from one administration have consequences.
Well, it also helps the Democrats don't have a criminal insurrectionist leading the party.
You can do whatever you want. What TV channels are interviewing you this week?
I'm referring to what Fetterman was criticizing, not what the OP or others here discuss about Fetterman or Biden.
Oh, Gaza. Right. I am so sick of hearing about "genocide". It's BS. Despite what Israel has done over the decades, Hamas is responsible for this. They launched an offensive that had no clear objectives (like autonomy) other than killing Israelis, and specifically civilians. Now that they're getting their ass handed to them, which was inevitable, losing a poorly-conceived offensive is coined "genocide". Hamas thanks you.
John Fetterman beat two other well-pedigreed Democratic Senate nomination candidates, won an election over a very publicly popular GOP candidate, and took the seat of Republican Pat Toomey. While this is one data point that you cite, it doesn't support that "my generation's" idea of progressive is losing elections. If a lack of "sufficiently progressive" candidates is losing elections for Democrats due to progressives not voting for Democrats, those progressives are shooting themselves in the foot as the only what to get more left-leaning Democrats is to actually win elections.
Ahh, so we adopt the same ideologies as them. Surely equating valid criticism as aiding the enemy will lead to a better democratic candidate......
This is exactly how the GOP fell to a fascist, by making criticism within the party political suicide.
Make you kick rocks? I mean I guess, but I'm going to need an address?
Like 10-12. I didn't think it was anything special, but apparently being your mom's 1000th customer is pretty big news. I didn't even know prostitution was such a celebrated custom up north!
Palestinians right to existence?
What would you call it? At what point do war crimes turn into genocide?
And that is bad..... correct? Doesn't that imply that killing civilians is inappropriate? Hmm it's almost like it's a war crime or something?
So if killing 700 civilians is bad, what is killing 25k?
Well they are mostly killing women and children, so I guess that makes it easier?
It's mostly the targeting of civilian population, the collective punishment, the targeting of key civilian infrastructure, the targeting of international journalists and aid workers, the targeting of hospitals, and the summary executions.
Then there's the fact that Hamas only had 25k members and they've already killed well over 25k people, most of which have been women and children. So either Hamas was primarily made up of women and children.......or the idfs not really discriminating against who they are killing.
You can't vote for someone if they aren't even an option? Democrats win when we can actually get young people excited to vote. It's the whole reason Fetterman won in the first place.
It's not a battle between having just a better candidate than the Republicans, it's about getting a candidate that's progressive enough to get young people to the booths.
Is he? This doesn't look like someone particularly concerned with pragmatism to me.