this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
1354 points (99.1% liked)
White People Twitter
4453 readers
2274 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a tweet or similar
- No bullying.
- Be excellent to each other.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
We got a shitty version of Republican healthcare reform, and Republicans and moderates refuse to admit we need anything more.
Republicans want to tear it down
And "moderates" say asking for more is somehow worse than being a Republican.
Shits not getting better till will finally get neoliberal.politicians out of the Dem party and back where they came from: the Republican party.
I don't know why people act like they don't understand opening the "left party" up to "fiscally conservative moderates" just concentrates all the crazy in the Republican party and depresses turnout from the right.
If you're trying to stop facism, we're taking the wrong path.
If you're trying to make sure the wealthy always win tho, yeah, this makes sense. But the fascists are going to keep winning half the time.
When they could be winning 0% of the time if we just gave Dem voters candidates they want. Because any "moderate" voters that go R, are statistically insignificant.
They're just loud and insist they're always right. Theyre Karen's.
And we need to go back to just ignoring them.
What in the sam hell are you trying to communicate with this word salad?
But if you want to talk politics and healthcare, there's one party that's made any real effort at improvement in the last 2 decades, and it's the Democrats. The Republicans try to gut the system at every opportunity.
There are plenty of Democrats in Congress that would like to continue to improve healthcare, but the Dems don't have the numbers - particularly in the House - to pass further reform.
So you're saying therenis both "plenty" but also "not enough"?
That doesn't make logical sense to me...
I'm saying not everyone Dem in office really wants to fix healthcare, as evident as there seems to always be just enough against progress to stop progress.
And that logically it's a safe assumption there's even more that would oppose progress if they had to, they just don't want to publicly oppose it unless they're forced to.
So we basically have two choices.
Be reactive and keep assuming every Dem supports the party platform until they personally pull a Joe Manchin
Be proactive and make sure the people on our team our really on our team before we have to rely on them. So that when we have the House, Senate, and presidency we can accomplish stuff.
And they got a more conservative version of Mitt Romney's plan passed...
And have spent over a decade opposi g we improve it up to at least where the Republican presidential candidate was 16 years ago...
That's not enough dawg
Voters want more, they deserve more. So why not give voters a candidate that agrees so that we can easily prevent fascists from getting elected?
I don't see any downsides to the Dem party running Dem politicians that agree with Dem voters.
I agree with all you're saying. Obama's Romneycare was also a huge gift to the insurance companies.
Yeah, we didn't get healthcare, we got a penalty for not being able to afford insurance...
I get people being excited for any progress back then, I was too.
But it's 16 years later and now we want from both parties presenting plans to improving it, to one party trying to burn it down and one insisting asking for progress is worse than burning it down...
People just treat it like a team sport now. If you're not praising their pick, it means you picked the other team.
Meanwhile I'm just out here advocating for the fundamentals.
Like, what did happen to the picks and roll?
Why do they not want other people to have their basic needs met?
I guess because it's not profitable?
It makes labor more expensive because people will be less desperate for wages.
The more desperate someone is, the less they're able to plan ahead and evaluate options.
They're focused on the short term and only plan to avoid short term negatives.
The people who get irrationally upset when you ask for more out of the Dem party are great examples of that. They're so stressed and afraid that everything becomes a binary choice of two options that can't be I fluenced in any way
It's basic psychology and why Republicans went from Nixon resigning because he knew voters wouldn't tolerate his illegal actions to modern day trumpets.
The same thing will happen to the Dem party if we walk down the same path as the Republican party.
And thats what the rich want.
Its why WB bought CNN, their board members flat out said it.
Refusing to vote (or making a worthless vote) isn't the way forward.
Ideally the Republicans are relegated to the trash bin and the Dem party splits into two, the Squad/Bernie party and the Clinton/Pelosi party.
God you have to stop writing one sentence per paragraph.
Shit is so unreadable.
All it does is take up space.