What is wrong with the Democrats, it’s bizarre.

The republican-adjacent wing of the party has the candidate they want, and they’re so unforgivably pigheaded that they would rather lose democracy forever than change.

Able? Not with the current House. Willing? Also no, progressives are calling for it.

You still have no evidence. If you did, you would have presented it instead of being a self-admitted troll.

Your accusations that I’m a maga bot? You have no evidence of anyone being a maga bot.

For their part, the DNC and Wasserman Schultz have characterized the DNC charter’s promise of “impartiality and evenhandedness” as a mere political promise——political rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal courts. The Court does not accept this trivialization of the DNC’s governing principles. While it may be true in the abstract that the DNC has the right to have its delegates “go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way,” DE 54, at 36:22-24, the DNC, through its charter, has committed itself to a higher principle.

That “cigars” quote was from the DNC’s legal counsel, acting as the party’s representative in court. This was after the party had already engaged in fuckery and were arguing in court that they should get away with it.

That’s the party’s position regarding its charter when it’s convenient to do so, which is to say, when they want to fuck over a progressive. But when there’s a centrist that the party wants to hang on to, then the charter was brought down on stone tablets from Mount Sinai.

Fascinating. It sounds like your theory is that the Democrats floated the public option and the BBBA, just so they could go through an elaborate ruse following by killing it on purpose after months of work and preparation, only to introduce second weakened iterations of both of them (the ACA and IRA) which still did massive amounts for the country, and they went through all that just so their second version could… look wimpier by comparison to the initial version they shot down on purpose, maybe? IDK.

I don’t consider it implausible that politicians would break their promises, no. I voted for the public option. I voted for Obama because his plan had a public option and no individual mandate. What we got passed by reconciliation along party lines. It had the individual mandate. It had no public option. It passed along party lines in reconciliation, meaning that Democrats abandoned so much to get the support of Republicans, who didn’t vote for it anyway. It had a medicaid expansion that was optional, so my state didn’t accept it. Biden said he was going to revisit the public option. To my complete lack of surprise, he didn’t.

I voted against Trump in 2020, since after the ACA I didn’t believe a promise from a Democratic candidate. Turns out, my distrust was founded. BBB was a bill of goods designed to be abandoned, just like the public option. They put on a hell of a show abandoning it, but at the end of the day, there were enough no votes to kill it, just like with the public option. In both cases, it died without Republicans touching it.

The wimpy remaining bills are something, yes, but the primary function seems to be something for centrists to point at when they’re ordering progressives to be happy with their presidents’ signature failures.

I wouldn’t look at that as a “well I guess there’s no difference between the two, and the lack of progress is DEFINITELY the Democrats’ fault, citation trust me bro” situation.

I have never said both parties are the same, and i provided examples of Democrats finding the votes to kill progressive legislation.

The half a trillion dollars worth of student loan forgiveness passed.

A few things about this, It didn’t pass. It never came to a vote. It was an executive order. Centrists didn’t want it. Biden, in the only surprise of his presidency so far, listened to progressives on student loans, but only after years of pressure. Centrists insisted his hands were tied until he signed it. And we’ve discussed this before. I consider student loans to be the high point of the Biden presidency. But if it were before the Senate and not an executive order, Manchin would have killed it.

And I just got to the paragraph where you call me Goebbels. Conversation’s over. Godwin.

You’re upset that I’m accusing you of lying, then accusing me of “loving genocide” which is a lie.

Read it again. I said you want the people you lie about to love genocide. Though since you’ve repeatedly lied about ignoring me, lied about blocking me, and lied about people to your left being maga bots, I have reason to doubt when you say you don’t love genocide.

Then antagonizing me to block you.

I was wondering because generally when you get tired of calling me a trumpist because I don’t support genocide, you make a big show of ignoring/blocking me only to demonstrate that it’s yet another lie the following day. I’m wondering when you clock out, basically.

I’m not and you’re lying about me, like you lie about anyone who doesn’t love genocide like you want them to. When are you gonna pretend to block me?

Holy shit, you can read!

You sure like to ignore bills that Democrats joined Republicans in blocking.

Yes, except on lemmy, where it means anyone to the left of Manchin.

You’re gonna pretend they didn’t kill the public option, the minimum wage increase, and BBB? You’re gonna pretend Democrats got rid of the filibuster so they could pursue what they ran on? You’re gonna pretend they tried to codify Roe?

The shit Democrats passed is nothing in the face of things they ran on and didn’t pursue.

ffs, you’re still trying to coast on the ACA, which was 15 years ago.

My statement is based on decades of watching Democrats not change shit and capitulating to Republicans.

We needed Biden to be much better than he was. Trump is always shit.

We won’t do it then, either. We’ll just figure out a larger number of senators we’ll need to do anything.

The Democrats have pretty reliably attempted to pursue policies which are trying to benefit “the country” with increasingly working class aligned definitions of who it is that represents “the country”.

And even more reliably find just enough no votes to make sure the policies they’re ostensibly pursuing don’t pass.

His stutter didn’t cause him to declare victory over Medicare.

Please, for the love of god, stop insulting everyone’s intelligence. There is no excuse that will make this better.

Strategic votes. Not people.

Yes, Numbers cast votes in your universe because numbers can be manipulated without putting in as much work.

If it were an actual representation of people, then Trump would never have been President, having lost the popular vote in 2016.

Clinton was such a shitty candidate that she didn’t take the electoral college into account and didn’t campaign to all those non-people you despise in the worthless flyover states. They were beneath her because numbers were gonna vote for her instead. Look at how that worked out.

I mean the party only wants people who don’t want to change anything at all except for the worse, just like their Republican buddies, yes.

This article explains how things really work and how the elected delegates are legally binded to Biden on the first ballot and that it would be illegal for anybody in the executive committee or anybody besides Job Biden to release the delegates.

How utterly convenient from the party whose rules are discretionary when they want to fuck over progressives.

You misread the transcripts

Gaslight someone else. I read the transcripts correctly.

Even if the lawyer had said that it would still be completely incorrect.

Even if you provide a source, he said the opposite before a judge. Not under oath is bullshit.