this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
109 points (92.2% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2310 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. 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.
  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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jordan117 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

This would be a compelling argument if the Biden administration hadn't been the most economically progressive since LBJ.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod 11 points 3 days ago

The problem is that he is the most progressive and did so little that people didn’t notice anything at all.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yup, and this is why Democrats lose. They are allergic to actually supporting the party's real accomplishments and prefer to throw stones and circle the firing squad. Democrats need to learn how to play the game. There is too much of this fart sniffing on the left these days.

[–] Quadhammer 1 points 3 days ago

It's by design. Keep em arguing amongst themselves

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

My gut says "that's probably true, but that doesn't mean much." Let me pick it apart.

  • LBJ attempted his War on Poverty and Great Society, and while it didn't go as far as he wanted, he still got some good stuff out the door. Food stamps, medicare, medicaid, minimum wage, just to name a few. No contest compared to everybody that came later.

  • Nixon was a Republican, and I'll skip all of them because by this point in history they would never be as economically progressive as Biden.

  • Ford was a Republican.

  • Carter ran on being socially liberal and economically conservative. Outside of minor policy like the Community Reinvestment Act, there's no help there, obviously.

  • Reagan was a Republican.

  • Clinton ran on the Third Way, which was sort of what Carter did but even more disastrous. Notable policy included gutting welfare and widespread deregulation.

  • W was a Republican.

  • Obama got ACA passed and used an obviously Keynesian approach to economic recovery with the recession he was given, pulling away from Clinton's conservative Third Way.

  • Trump was a Republican.

  • Biden did a similar Keynesian approach to economics.

I would assume your statement hinges largely on the "biggest infrastructure bill" type rhetoric, because he didn't do anything new, he just continued to fund things that the government needs to fund in order for the country to operate. He sure spent a lot, but whether that's the metric we should be using for most progressive is up for debate.

Personally, I'd say Obama was more progressive because he actually did something substantial and new with the ACA, but it doesn't put him in another tier above Biden. Of course, neither comes remotely close to LBJ.

What that statement really shows is how far the government has fallen from even attempting to provide value for people.

[–] Maggoty -1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Oh God that was a good laugh. Do another joke!

[–] Jordan117 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Democratic presidents since LBJ:

  • Jimmy Carter
  • Bill Clinton
  • Barack Obama

Which ones had a bigger record of progressive economic accomplishments than Biden? Closest one is Obama, but his Recovery Act was less than half the size of Biden's Rescue/Infra/IRA/CHIPS packages. Biden was also more strongly pro-union and pro-regulation, and accomplished his many wins in half the time and with far narrower majorities in both houses.

[–] Maggoty 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yup Biden sure was great for Billionaires. No argument there.

[–] Lasherz12 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Howard Shultz doesn't think so. Neither does Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, or any of the other ghouls that prefer to violate union rules. Doesn't mean you have to like the guy to admit the obvious.

[–] Maggoty 3 points 3 days ago

They just weren't the right Billionaires. Biden gave gifts to the railroads, auto industry, and construction. They don't like to jump up and down on stages but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

And yeah he taxed them a little bit but their wealth still grew at record pace under Biden while middle America is struggling to buy cereal. I don't care how much the guy says he loves unions, if Union members can't get a house then it doesn't matter does it?