• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    200
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Man I’m a progressive and even I can tell this is propaganda.

    Also, missed a bunch of presidents? Bush 1 after Reagan. Lyndon B, Nixon, Ford and CARTER between Kennedy and Reagan.

    I obviously agree with the overall message (that “both sides” is and always has been bullshit) but c’mon man.

    Edit: like, you could put the actual campaign goals and summarized impacts and then it would be a real infographic. Like “passed tax cuts for top _% of income earning Americans” “repealed gun laws”. It’s still cherry picking and biased but that’s what moves something like this out of the realm of propaganda and into I dunno…something more like biased news? Bias isn’t inherently bad, obviously when you’re trying to have an argument you have a side and an agenda.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        97 months ago

        You’re right. It’s not an infographic. It’s also not a meme.

        It’s a political cartoon. Definition from Brittanica: " a drawing (often including caricature) made for the purpose of conveying editorial commentary on politics, politicians, and current events. "

    • OptionalOP
      link
      fedilink
      157 months ago

      Man I’m a progressive and even I can tell this is propaganda.

      Aw man, you saw right through it!

      I was told you progressives were smart but you caught this propaganda in no time! And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren’t for you meddling progressives!!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        117 months ago

        Ok how else would you word that I’m on the political “side” of the meme and still call it out for being kinda shitty by misrepresenting the ‘other side’ in a way that undermines the credibility of the message?

        I did not expect this to blow up and made an offhand criticism that used a cliche literary device before heading out for the day. I apologize for getting tripped up when information is misleading or inaccurate, it’s a condition, and obviously I am long overdue at the gulag

        Y’all take stuff way too seriously on the Internet.

        • OptionalOP
          link
          fedilink
          27 months ago

          It obviously has a point of view. Just like any text, image, or other media.

          It’s fun because it’s pretty much true. If you want to make sure to include Johnson (hey - can we do the whole JFK thing here? Cause you know Johnson was . . . I guess that wouldn’t fit in this particular meme) or Carter (yeah a meme is probably not the place to re-litigate his administration, though that’s a good idea) one could, and apparently that would work towards being less “propaganda” like, but it wouldn’t be very brief.

          If you’re saying the overall message of the meme is wrong, well we’ll disagree there. But if you’re saying it’s just not properly balanced; I mean - Yeah. Obviously. Y’know what else isn’t properly balanced, though - actual news articles from the New York Times and Washington Post, every single day. “Biden is old, Biden fares poorly in some poll we found on the floor. Trump does outlandish bullshit again, people love it.” C’mon. We can take a look at the point of view of those articles and that would be propaganda in a more denotative sense.

          So calling out a pro-Biden meme for being propaganda is, well, not wrong, but . . . kinda . . irrelevant? Hey, you wanna explore each of the listed presidential administrations and go through their accomplishments to see how true the meme is? Man, that’s a long thread but we can do that - and when we finish, guess what - it’ll be pretty close to this. But sure. Why not, Let’s go.

          I guess we can, what, use JFK as a “gimme” and just allow that a defining accomplishment was to create the space program as we know it. Should we add anything in there about the Cuban Missle Crisis or - ? What even would that be? “Faced down communist aggression”? “Skillfully negotiated aggressive military . . something”? Yeah ok let’s just leave it at the moon thing. I mean, he only got three years, right.

          Reagan. Why’d we jump to Reagan? We missed Nixon! Oh man, where are the Nixon memes amirite. Well, Regan - who as we know served two terms - really laid the foundation for the absolute mind-meltingly disastrous republican party politics that we know and love today. What was the defining element of his two administrations? (Should we split the two or just - I guess the format is for one line each so, no - ok) Well, he’s really most famous for taking money from federal programs and giving it to the military contractors or back to other people who have money, i.e. the rich. It’s actually pretty apt. But we can debate that one, everyone loves a good Reagan hullabaloo. We could also do the October Surprise, or Iran Contra, or invading El Salvador or a bunch of other shady shit, but let’s go on an "affects Americans daily lives’ bend. “Gave money to the rich” is correct.

          Bush I - oops we skipped him, hm. Why’s that I wonder. (Oh, hey maybe it’s two term presidents only?) Eh, Let’s just put Iraq I and then I guess we’ll have to figure out why we went to war for oil. Oh - or we could just put “blood for oil” and hope that the economic implication is obvious enough. Anyway, moving on.

          Clinton - well, we could talk about the whole healthcare reform thing that was a major component of the first term. Or in how he pulled the rug out from under Newt “contract with America” Gingrich by declaring big government “over” and adding a ton more cops. That’s . . y’know . . true but . . . not as . . pithy? as we’re going for here. His balancing the budget and actually leaving office with a surplus is, frankly, astonishing in retrospect though. It’s absolutely no small feat and no one thought it was even possible since Reagan just said it’s fine to blow all the money and hope future generations figure it out. Well, he figured it out. So that’s not nothing. That doesn’t seem like propaganda, that seems about right actually.

          Okay the meme is getting really long at this point but I think you see the direction I’m going here. Is it misinterpreting “the other side”? Only in the sense that a meme is a single point of view and a deep discussion of the differences would be more balanced and nuanced but also take a long time and wouldnt ultimately be that far off from what we have.

          So if you really feel like this meme is some horrible brainwashing propaganda of “the liberal left” or whatever? I dunno what to tell ya. Yeah? I guess? And it’s nice?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27 months ago

      political memes are propaganda. all of them. always have been always will.

      there are no exceptions, only examples which oppress and exploit more or less.

      something this sublemmy needs to get into its head.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        8
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        As the New York Times’ coverage of the Israeli Genocide has made obvious to even the blindest most tribalist of people, the “liberal” media was and is just as hard spouting propaganda as the far-right one.

        Personally I think that the decay from Journalism into “Opinion Forming” in the traditional more liberal Press long predates the Fox-News Age and their destruction of the trust in the Traditional Press for temporary political gains of “their side” created the prime conditions for the rise of the made-up-outrage “Press” that so well fits the modus operandi of far-right populism and hence fed and was fed by made-up-outrage far-right populist politicians like Trump.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            17 months ago

            It’s all about Trust.

            People used to believe in the Press - it was what is called an Authoritative Source.

            What the breaking of Trust in the Press - the greatest most influential of Autoritative Sources - did was create an environment were most people don’t believe in Authoritative Sources, hence were each individual - ignorant, untrained in analytical thinking, with neither the time, the access or the knowledge to trully dig down on a subject - is on his or her own to figure out what is true and is not.

            This new environment didn’t just open the doors for the likes of Fox News, it openned the doors for Anti-Vaxing, Russian interference, countless Internet conspiracies and an Era were Politics is essentially professional scam artists managing scams - the damage is way vaster than merelly their some sleazy manipulative “news” pieces.

            I absolutelly blame them for that: for the sake of momentary political gains for their team, newsmedia which for decades were trusted and respected broke the entire Trust Hierarchy and created the conditions for chaos and what looks more and more like Fascism.

            The other side, that of assholes being assholes, is nothing compared to the betrayal by those you trusted.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                27 months ago

                Well, having lived in a country with actual Proportional Vote, I would say that the “just win” mindset is derived from the two party system you get in First Past The Post representative allocation systems like the US, probably with a pinch of the higher aggressiveness of baseline American culture.

                That said, I don’t think the aggressive “just win” posture we see reflects them being different, quite the contrary: it’s Theatre for the masses because the two sides of the Power Duopoly are too similar, so lots of posturing with loud disagreements serves to both keep their own tribe (the people whose relation to politics is similar to their relation to sports: they have chosen a “team”) inspired and acting as unthinking supporters and keeping the rest of people thinking there is true competition when there really isn’t. This is why most of the fight is happening in the Moral field (stuff like LGBT rights) rather than anything to do with Power, Wealth and Quality Of Life - in the things that matter the most for those politicians both parties think the same, leaving only the things they don’t genuinelly care about as the field in which put one a very loud, very dramatic theatrical play about how difference they are.

                By the way, I liked your idea of using “enshittification” for Society and Politics and I hope you don’t mind if I use it in my own posts.

                Personally my own approach to help change things is to go around pointing the inconsitencies out to get at least some people thiking about it. I’m also a member of a small political party in the country I lived in and was also in one back when I lived in Britain (though there it’s a lot like the US and, frankly, at best things will need to get a lot worse before people are pissed of enough to change them).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        Now we have hate boner political infotainment. It’s disgusting.

        We need a free press, but we need to figure out how to deal with those that take advantage of their status… In this case, all of them…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      287 months ago

      But… he’s old! And not perfect!!! So obviously, we should stay home and see how much better our lives will be under Trump when it’s his last (legal) term and literally what keeps him out of prison… Duh.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      25
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      “saving democracy” tho; lol. if he wanted to do that, why the fuck is he running again?

      edit: that feels more like ‘dangling democracy over a trumpian abyss to jack off his own geriatric ego’.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          167 months ago

          He’s certainly not destroying it

          Oh, yes, the only two options. Death or life support. No way to improve it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            10
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            How could someone improve democracy and who would it be?

            Edit: weird that I would be down voted for asking who and how to improve democracy.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Okay, while I think the other person’s complaints are unreasonable and dishonest, I really need to answer this sincerely, because it’s genuinely important that people understand.

              Ways that American democracy can be improved:

              1. Eliminating lobbyists

              2. Capping how much money can be spent on political campaigns

              3. Capping individual donation sizes

              4. Capping donation frequency

              5. Implementing a cardinal or ordinal voting system (such as approval or single transferable vote)

              6. Making voting more accessible

              7. Removing the possibility of gerrymandering

              8. Outlawing political parties

              9. Making voting mandatory

              10. Several other things who’s scope mean they probably don’t count (like better education, which would help citizens perform democracy better, but also clearly falls outside the scope of the list) or that I am otherwise forgetting.

              Edit:formatting.

              Edit2: I never intended to answer “who” because that question doesn’t have a single answer; the president can’t do those things, and it’s silly to expect them to.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                47 months ago

                You didn’t answer who. Who is so much better than Biden that they would be able to do all of this.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  8
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  Despite his age, Bernie Sanders is still the most qualified person to be president. He would get more done and made election reform a focus of his campaigns.

                • Admiral Patrick
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  27 months ago

                  Not only did they not answer the question of “who”, they instead listed off a wish list of things no president is able to do unilaterally. Like, those are all good things, but blaming the current incumbent / candidate for not doing those is a completely ignorant take (if not intentionally moving the goalposts).

                  We need better civics lessons both in K-12 and maybe some kind of adult education classes.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                27 months ago

                Unfortunately, I don’t see how any president can do any of those. The best he can do is appoint competent justices and try to persuade Congress

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  4
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  So in this case, expand the Supreme Court? And at least mention these issues at all?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  17 months ago

                  Correct; the president can’t do those things, hence why the other commentor’s complaints didn’t make sense. I was answering the question of how.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                37 months ago

                Great, a usual list of improvements but you didn’t answer who. Who will be so much better than Biden and would accomplish this?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  37 months ago

                  Lawrence Lessig…

                  The problem isn’t that we don’t have solutions. The problem is that, collectively, we don’t have the will to implement them. It’s like effective Climate Change policy or Covid policies. At best, we’re getting half measures because people rather have their popcorn and circuses than saving their children. Biden doesn’t represent a solution, he represents a theater of a solution.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          7
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          he’s keeping anyone else from saving it. anyone whose chances are more than ’questionable’.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              97 months ago

              he’s the worst dipshit that could be running here, sucking up all the support for the smallest permissible ‘better’, when you have enough bipartisan issues to get support from both the left and sane-right if you ran anyone else. biden is not defending democracy; he’s dangling it over a cliff with Donald trump at the bottom.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                77 months ago

                Neirher West nor Stein would do anything different. In fact both of them want to give in to Putin and weaken democracy world wide. Who could do it better?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  7
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  anyone. else. literally anyone on my block, including many of the pets.

                  and if ‘west’ and ‘stein’ wouldn’t do anything different than biden, they’re shit too. your whole argument is that the entire democratic party is worthless, that none of them have any virtue to counter trump, just the exact same calculated amount of vice less, the smallest amount so we can say they’re not quite the same, following them down the intellectual lacuna, using them as a wind break?

                  that seems like a party I’m literally never going to vote for.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      117 months ago

      Good to see the ratio favoring logic and reason. Seems the anti-Biden propagandists are being run off finally.

      • BarqsHasBite
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I notice the .ml communities are, how to say it, “I’m 14 and edgy”.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          27 months ago

          Yep. I don’t know why they aren’t deferderated along with Hexbear. It’s pretty much the same people. They’re just circumventing the block via .ml.

          • BarqsHasBite
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Yeah I’m pretty close to seeing if I can block the whole instance, right now I’m all blocking certain communities. (I was banned from worldnews.ml for saying NATO was a defensive treaty lol.)

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              I blocked the entire instance when they banned me for suggesting that their meme responses were childish and a bad way to debate their point.

    • @Spazz
      link
      27 months ago

      They’re liars, they know full well what he’s accomplished, but they refuse to acknowledge it because their peers would ostracize them

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        147 months ago

        Gee, I wonder WHO was taking actions to prevent that from coming out as universal healthcare. And I wonder WHICH SIDE of the aisle they were on.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          67 months ago

          Per usual - it was Biden, rushing to the aid of republicans to assist with their agenda. Which in this case was watering down their own healthcare proposal in order to remove the public option. In fact, he conceded this portion of the bill before any negotiations had even begun, as a “show of good faith” toward his Republican colleagues. Thanks Biden.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      517 months ago

      Obama also campaigned that he would codify abortion into law, got elected, and then said it was not a priority. Then didn’t do anything to protect reproductive rights.

      This image is complete propaganda.

      • dream_weasel
        link
        fedilink
        167 months ago

        Ah yes, the old “it’s propaganda because it doesn’t include literally everything that has ever happened”.

        Bush dodged that shoe like a fucking boss so how bad a president could he have been?!

        Is it rosy colored? Sure. Does it still have a generally true premise? IMO yes.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          137 months ago

          Really stupid that we beat down the people on the left that demand a better candidate than the one who said he would be a one term president. A man who is further left than Nixon in most aspects. Yet, we have all these people who will die on the hill of Biden and we continue to ratchet to the right.

          • dream_weasel
            link
            fedilink
            77 months ago

            The meme here overstates Biden, but that’s not where you were originally poking.

            It’s totally fine to want a better candidate, but I don’t get down with cutting off your nose to spite your face: “Haha allowing authoritarianism and the erosion of democracy by non participation or durden voting will sure teach the Dems to pick a better candidate! Got em!”

            Side note, I think you mean right of Nixon, yeah?

          • OptionalOP
            link
            fedilink
            47 months ago

            A better candidate would have been 2021-2023. You missed your window of THREE YEARS.

            Okay, so let’s say Biden in 2024 for the sake of argument. Who’s the best candiate starting 2025? For the next President? Who. Name someone. Anyone.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              37 months ago

              For the Democratic Party: Pritzker would have handled it well. Maybe Beshear, even Evers.

              By 2025 I will be curious if Hobbs or Shapiro will have the chops. Maybe even Grisham or Kotek, who knows.

              And that’s just the governor pool.

              There are options and have been options.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            27 months ago

            Biden never actually said that, but the fact that you think he did tells me all I need to know about how little you pay attention and what news sources you follow.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        117 months ago

        Obama goal: end FPTP so the 2000 election doesn’t happen again and again Short term easily reversible promises

        Biden goal: what democracy, and how exactly

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod
          link
          fedilink
          English
          117 months ago

          what democracy, and how exactly

          A democracy where someone can lose the popular vote and still get elected president, and where a minority can hold both chambers of Congress, clearly

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      267 months ago

      If he is to be believed (and that is certainly up to debate), Obama’s goal was universal healthcare, and his compromise was the ACA.

      Personally I think as soon as the public option was gutted this compromise failed to meet what was sought out by the goal, so I don’t think it should be counted at all as achieving that goal, but I don’t think it’s inherently disingenuous to make the claim that Obama wanted universal healthcare… I guess he just didn’t want it enough.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      187 months ago

      People hate finding out the ACA is the Republican plan based on Romney’s healthcare system from MA.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        Well we couldn’t know what it said til they passed it. “Call it the stupidity of the American voter”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      107 months ago

      Obama supported the public option which would have been a form of universal healthcare. It was axed because Joe Lieberman spent months grandstanding and then Ted Kennedy died.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      87 months ago

      Lieberman threatened to join Republicans in filibuster to kill the public option and Obama’s response was “Okay, we’ll just pull that piece for you, no problem.”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    84
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    To be fair, I don’t believe Trump’s goal is more money for rich people.

    I believe it’s more money for himself but to do that he works towards more money for rich people because those rich people will in turn support and fund him further.

    He’s too damn selfish to actually consider people, rich or not.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      237 months ago

      Not even money, I have no doubt he just wants to be president to get out of all the rape and fraud accusations running against him.

      • The Snark Urge
        link
        fedilink
        English
        127 months ago

        The Romans are said to have conquered the world in self defense. Trump’s plan is to ruin it instead. Easier.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          67 months ago

          It’s funny to read this about self defense because I just wrote a letter to my representatives and NASA about funding for the Chandra X-ray telescope and pretty much used those terms too. We trade improvements to our shared existence in favor of “self defense” that just happens to bring us to other countries to bomb them all the time…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      27 months ago

      Before Trump, the Rich controlled America via the Politicians.

      Trump just removed the middle man.

      • ComradeSharkfucker
        link
        fedilink
        English
        27 months ago

        Politicians have always been part of the wealthy owning class, its built into the system becsuse the system was created by a wealthy owning class

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    687 months ago

    Democrats aren’t for more money for rich people? News to me. Nice job leaving off things like welfare reform, the crime bill, and the repeal of glass-steagall (which led to the 2008 global financial crisis) from under clinton. You left off obama continuing the policy of bailouts for the rich after the 2008 global financial crisis, his support for the surveillance state (and going after Snowden after claiming to protect whistleblowers), and bombing so many more countries (like Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria). Of course there’s the glaring absence of supporting genocide under biden, but I think you get the picture.

    Both sides aren’t the same in all things, but they are definitely the same in supporting the rich first and foremost. Democrats are better than republicans, but you’re not making a strong point by pretending democrats only do good things.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      17
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      In this system money is speech. Not literally, like the Supreme court has codified but in practice. No matter the party the only chance you have in getting elected is fund raising. It’s a shit system and no democrats aren’t a victim but their is no other credible option.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    677 months ago

    A huge part of Clinton’s deficit reduction was eviscerating welfare with the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act. He also made a lot of money for rich people by repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, which directly let to the 2008 financial collapse. Also, Obamacare is not Universal Healthcare; Obama would have needed to keep the Public Option for it to be considered universal coverage. He also made a lot of money for rich people through TARP.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      127 months ago

      Also, the year gaps are a little disingenuous. Like, where are Nixon, or even Carter. Like, Carter is a good man at least.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      57 months ago

      The public option was tanked by Senator Lieberman, who at that point became an independent. All we would have needed was a Republican to break ranks and we would have had a public option.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        A) Lieberman didn’t become an independent at that point, he’d been an independent since he lost his primary in 2006 B) no matter what the excuse, it doesn’t change the fact that saying the ACA is Universal Healthcare is a lie.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    647 months ago

    I would like to see a more accurate one that actually just listed passed and proposed legislation for each one instead of just circlejerk fodder.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    537 months ago

    Saving Democracy

    Biden was responsible for removing the democratically elected prime minister in Pakistan because he refused to follow the geopolitical whims of the USA. His entire party is dead in the water with several MNAs assasinated, hundreds tortured, and thousands of supporters still in jail without trial or bail.

    So respectfully, fuck off with this shitty propaganda meme.

  • Phoenixz
    link
    fedilink
    487 months ago

    I remember with each Presidential change, that when a Republican president came into power, they had a budget surplus, created by their democratic predecessor, which they then squandered, and when it was tome to switch to a democratic president, they got a deficit, and managed to work theyr way out of it. Each time, fox would comment on how these Democrat presidents always had a deficit. It was, and continues to be, maddening.

    Require news organizations to be truthful again, fuck that “but much first amendment” bullshit, one has nothing to do with the other

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    46
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Clinton is one of the worst. The party went, can’t beat 'em, might as well join em.

    Clinton essentially fulfilled some of the great Republican dreams of deregulation. See Glass-Stegall how he joined hands with Republicans. Which you can then fast forward to the banking and financial crisis that hit the world and screwed economies and brought austerity programs worldwide.

    Dare ya to read up on all the congressional stock trading from not just Repubs but very much Dems as well.

    The party went fully corporate with Clinton.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    467 months ago

    So glad Obama gave us universal healthcare… Oh wait.

    We all know this is bullshit right? Neither the Republicans or the Democrats give a shit about anything else then making rich people more money. I’m sorry to break it to you but the Democrats aren’t your friends. I know they pretended to be but they’re not. They are just as much your enemy as the Republicans. 😞

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      127 months ago

      At least you named yourself appropriately. Lazy. Otherwise, you would know that Obama attempted to provide a public option for healthcare. You do realize how politics works, right? You need a certain amount of votes and support in order to pass new legislation. If you don’t have enough votes on both sides of the aisle, then you change NOTHING. So yes, one side, the Democrats, tried to provide healthcare that had a public option, and the other side, the Republicans, fought tooth and nail to stop it.

      And you blame Obama. <polite golf clap>

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        177 months ago

        Personally attacking me right off the bat. Now that’s a sign of intelligence! /s

        So my point is that the Democrats never do what they say they will do. So pointing out that there was an unsuccessful attempt to create a public option doesn’t really undermine my point. It just illustrates it for me. Because the fact remains Obama didn’t not bring universal healthcare to the USA. I wish he had. I also wish he would have closed Guantanamo Bay like he promised. But again the Democrats just say nice things they don’t do them.

        I hate the Republicans too. I don’t attribute anything good to them. The I just don’t pretend that the Democrats actually care about working class Americans.

        I don’t have a particular axe to grind with Obama but if you need help seeing him as a charismatic individual who works against us on behalf of capital I recommend you look into how he downplayed the lead poisoning in flint Michigan https://youtu.be/AjugN-nUHh8?si=w_PTMd1QXzS47rQW

        If you need help seeing the Democrats as a whole as ruthless and against you i recommend you read about their pied Piper strategy https://theweek.com/speed-reads/1015258/the-pied-piper-strategy#:~:text=In Maryland%2C Pennsylvania%2C Colorado%2C,It also might backfire spectacularly.

        Good luck rude stranger ✌️😎

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      67 months ago

      We know and the point of this post is that voting for one of them and grinding down the other is a clear message of what people want. Rich dude making his friends richer should have been a no-brainer but people keep using slimy tactics like the one you are using to distract the people from that fact.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        177 months ago

        The rich people who pay them both through lobbyists know what the people actually want. We don’t need to vote more clearly. 🙃

        I’m not using a slimy tactic. This is my opinion. Sorry you think that not agreeing with you is slimy.

        I’m a socialist. The Republican and Democratic parties are Siamese twins. They cannot survive without each other. They are completely dependent on the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils. Pretending like the Democrats actually cared about you or will do the things they say they will is an understandable coping mechanism for our situation but it’s not real. 🤷

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          47 months ago

          One is moving the Overton window farther to the right. And it’s not like the other one is monolithic. They are forces within trying to do good but they have to negotiate with the institutions in place.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            14
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Yep it’s a ratcheting effect. The Republicans moves us to the right and the Dems don’t move at all. Together they shift the Overton window to the right over time. If the Democrats weren’t in on it they would move the Overton window to the left when they come into power but they never seem to. Do you know why that is? It’s because they are paid by the same ultra rich people to achieve the same agendas. The rest of it is a spectacle to keep the powerless fighting amongst ourselves.

            Also edit/add: love your user name.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              17 months ago

              I disagree. If the vote was clear towards the available left instead of a lack of votes, it would have an effect on the parties. It’s the thinking within the democrats that they need to appeal to the right in some way because they vote way more than the left right now.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                57 months ago

                I mean you’re free to disagree and think what you want, but it seems like the evidence points very clearly in the direction that the Dems have no intention of doing the things they say they will do.

                You can believe it’s just a coincidence and that if you vote harder, they’ll do the things you want but history doesn’t seem to agree. 🤷

                Regardless of how we get there, I hope we get to a future where the US can actually have good leftist policies. Good luck ✌️

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      167 months ago

      Biden:

      • Discontinued American Rescue Plan programs that helped low income Americans like the Expanded Child Tax Credit.
      • Did $1,200 payments during covid (-Promissed $2,000)
      • Did not actually do meaningful college debt relief (“muh, but the courts” - shut up, the Secretary Of education has the power, he really just doesn’t care about it that much)
      • Still kinda sorta half asking the effort via another legal argument
      • Cabinet full of corporate ghouls
      • Based Lina Khan and NLRB
      • Unconditional support for Israel
      • Did not deschedule marijuana (“working” on it, believe when you see it)
      • Continued monetary incentives and subsidies for anti-union corps
      • Left Afghanistan
      • No challenge to the Supreme Court corruption
      • No real platform for re-election, no interviews, no debate, no primaries

      A bunch more.

      Trump: Literally nothing good. Just way worse all around.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    42
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Clinton repealled the Glass-Steagal act, which led to the 2008 crash, Obama’s unconditional bailouts of financial institutions and ultra-low interest rates and subsequent hyperfinancialization of the Economy, the current house prices bubbles, an explosion in inequality, and an even further collapse of social mobility in the US.

    To say that he doubled-down on Reagan’s work is an underestimation.

    Sure, it’s all a bit obscure for those who weren’t in Finance during the period around 2008, but that doesn’t make it any less so.

    (And lets not forget his wife’s later “got paid million dollar for a speech to a room full of financiers” that helped her loose to none other than Donald Trump)

    The idea that almost all those Democrats in that list didn’t do “More money for the rich” is hilarious.

    Also as an European in a country with a National Health Service, celebrating Obama’s version of “Universal Healthcare” is “you’re fucking kidding me”-level insulting.

    That stuff is some Narnia-level Eyes Hard Closed level of tribalist self-delusion.

    • @Spazz
      link
      87 months ago

      That’s a giant load of revisionist history

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        The alternative explanation is that you’re a commited member of this specific political tribe and just have to defended those you see as your chiefs no matter what, even if lacking an actual argument.

        This alternative explanation perfectly explains the absence of even a shred of an actual counter argument in your post.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I was right in the middle of the Investment Banking Industry back at the time and paid close attention to all the details about how the entire thing was conducted and the kind of market interventions going on, rather than just eat up the high level bullshit fed to pre-convinced members of that specific political tribe who don’t know how the business works …

        I actually had a pretty good opinion of Obama up until I saw who he put there conduction the bailouts, how they were conducted, how the pain was distributed, how the market was intervened in and which economic strata were saved with whose money.

        TARP doesn’t even amount to a tip of an iceberg.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    397 months ago

    Don’t forget deregulation, those fuckers love removing protections for the environment and workers.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      67 months ago

      Yeah but deregulation is ultimately just a way for them to give more money to rich people.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      17 months ago

      The democratic governor in my state recently succeeded in a years long endeavor to legalize gambling. That’s deregulation too

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          17 months ago

          Well… Why not? How is it different? Deregulation generally refers to smaller loosenings(and smaller legalizations) rather than outright legalization- but that’s a kinda arbitrary distinction

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            Legalization:- whether or not it’s legal to do something.

            Deregulation:- removing rules and enforcement around something that’s already legal.

            Like I said, it’s subtle.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    397 months ago

    I would not say both sides are the same, but this a bullshit oversimplification. The dems are not some ray of sunshine who have only made this country better.