• Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m frustrated with the reflexive “both sides are equally bad” response that shuts down any meaningful analysis of what’s actually happening in our politics.

    I’m not naive about the Democratic Party’s problems. They struggle with internal divisions, sometimes cave to corporate pressure, and they’ve made compromises that disappointed their base. But when I look at voting records, policy proposals, and legislative priorities, I see meaningful differences that have real consequences for people’s lives.

    On issues I care about (healthcare access, climate action, voting rights, ext.) one party consistently proposes solutions and votes for them when they have the numbers. The other party doesn’t just oppose these policies, they fight tooth and nail to undermine them, delay them, or dismantle them entirely. That’s not a matter of opinion. That’s a matter of public record.

    When Democrats fail to deliver, it’s often because they lack sufficient majorities or face procedural roadblocks. When they do have power, they’ve passed significant legislation on infrastructure, climate investment, and healthcare expansion. Meanwhile, when Republicans have unified control, their priorities have been tax cuts for the wealthy and rolling back environmental protections.

    I understand the appeal of cynicism. It can feel sophisticated to dismiss all politicians as equally corrupt. But that cynicism serves the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.

    If you can’t tell the difference between someone trying to reform a broken system and someone actively working to keep it broken, you’re not offering insight. You’re providing cover for obstruction.

    Does this mean Democrats are perfect? Of course not. Should we hold them accountable when they fall short? Absolutely. But pretending there are no meaningful differences between the parties just because neither is perfect makes it harder to build the coalitions we need to create the change we actually want to see.

    • Wolf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I’m frustrated with the reflexive “both sides are equally bad”

      No one is saying both sides are equally bad. And we keep saying this over and over, and it gets ignored. Just so were on the same page NO ONE is saying both sides equally bad.

      …response that shuts down any meaningful analysis of what’s actually happening in our politics.

      Ironically it’s usually the opposite. Someone will make the lightest possible criticism of Liberals and the knee-jerk reaction to that is “So you think both sides are equally bad?!” That’s what usually shuts the conversation down.

      sometimes cave to corporate pressure

      Try replacing sometimes with “usually”. They may be different corps, but almost all of them are in the pocket of one corp or another.

      they’ve made compromises that disappointed their base

      That’s putting it mildly.

      I see meaningful differences that have real consequences for people’s lives.

      Of course, and again literally no one is saying they are equally bad. You can vote for the less bad option while still hoping for meaningful change.

      On issues I care about (healthcare access, climate action, voting rights, ext.) one party consistently proposes solutions and votes for them when they have the numbers.

      It’s usually weak, ineffective half-measures more designed to look progressive than actually being progressive, but sure if you compare them to literal Nazi’s they are saints.

      When Democrats fail to deliver, it’s often because they lack sufficient majorities or face procedural roadblocks. When they do have power, they’ve passed significant legislation on infrastructure, climate investment, and healthcare expansion.

      So, just as an example when Obama was president and Dems had the majority in both houses of congress, and Republicans were shitting all over themselves proving that they would not compromise a single inch- instead of passing any type of “Medicare for all” or “Right to Healthcare” they passed the highly compromised “Affordable Care Act”. Why? Contrast that fact with this statement from Obama prior to the election.

      I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program," Obama said. "I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we’ve got to take back the White House, we’ve got to take back the Senate, and we’ve got to take back the House.

      Odd that when the Dems had “taken back” the White House and both houses of Congress the best they could do was a watered down and problematic solution that still left a lot of people without health care. It’s not like compromising on that gained them a single Republican vote.

      “Coincidentally” the Healthcare Industry ‘donated’ over $20 million to the Obama campaign, way more than even the almost $8 million they ‘donated’ to John McCain. Very odd indeed.

      But that cynicism serves the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.

      I honestly can’t think of a single institution anywhere in the world more devoted to maintaining the status quo than the DNC. Not one. They aren’t ‘progressive’ in any way. Obama didn’t even come out in support of Gay Marriage until he had been president for over 3 years, and after right wing Democrat Joe Biden already had. This wasn’t due to some sense of fairness or equality, it was political pressure.

      If you can’t tell the difference between someone trying to reform a broken system and someone actively working to keep it broken, you’re not offering insight. You’re providing cover for obstruction

      By refusing to even hear about potential failings of ‘liberal democrats’ without engaging in ‘whataboutism’, it only strengthens the DNC’s position as the ‘good guys, fighting for reform’ when the reality is they are the ‘less bad guys, fighting to maintain the status quo’.

      Fascists are bad. We all know they are bad. We all know they are worse than a bunch of corporate stooges who want everyone to be slaves to Capitalism, but at least you can feel good they are doing the bare minimum to address the multitudes of problems in the country.

      There is a third option, and there is absolutely noting wrong with pointing out the flaws on both sides of the Two Party system and hoping for a future of ‘actually good’ instead of ‘less bad’. Even if it is just a dream, I’d rather waste my life trying to make those dreams real than throwing my arms up and saying “This is the best we can ever hope for”.

    • salacious_coaster@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I agree with you that the parties are not the same. The GOP are outright evil puppets of the billionaire class. The Democrats are ineffectual cowards who’ve made careers out of paying lip service to the right thing, and every now and then doing something helpful if it’s convenient for them and doesn’t piss off their billionaire donors. A lot of the time that ends up translating to the same results for most people.

      I don’t buy the “sorry, our hands are tied” line we always get from the left. Dems throw up their hands even when they do have majorities. The first meaningful opportunity the Democrats had to obstruct Trump’s agenda, after the left base had been screaming for weeks for their representatives to do something, Schumer rolled over immediately. I can’t take this party seriously anymore.

      • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        I won’t defend Schumer’s choice here. It was a bad call, and the anger from House Democrats and the base was completely justified. You’re right that the party leadership sometimes folds when they should fight. They make strategic decisions that feel disconnected from the urgency the moment demands. And yes, Democrats have corporate-aligned figures who blunt the force of reform, but that is also a reality of our current system that we have to work within.

        But, sticking to your example, there is a key difference: when Democrats cave, it’s often to avoid causing harm, like a shutdown that would devastate working people. When Republicans cave, it’s to secure more tax cuts, more deregulation, and more authoritarian power. The intent and the outcome are not the same, even if the compromise leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth.

        It also matters that Democrats have factions pushing from within. The anger from House Dems, from AOC, from the base, that’s real pressure that can move things. Republicans don’t have that kind of internal accountability. Their party punishes dissent and rewards obstruction.

        And while it’s easy to say “they always have excuses,” the reality is that even when Democrats had a trifecta in 2021, their margin in the Senate was literally 50-50. One or two bad actors (like Manchin or Sinema) could tank an entire agenda, and did. That’s not an excuse. That’s a math problem, and the only way around it is bigger, more engaged progressive coalitions.

        So yes, Schumer failed in that moment (and many others). Yes, we should be furious. But walking away or writing off the party entirely means handing power back to a movement that’s not just flawed. It’s actively hostile to democracy, human rights, and the planet. That’s not moral purity. That’s surrender.

        • salacious_coaster@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Your defense of the Democrats boils down to “at least we’re not the GOP.” And you’re not wrong. I’ve done my part by voting against the GOP in every election since I was eligible. The Democrats themselves don’t even do that. I wish their effort would at least match mine, seeing as it’s their full-time job. And I wish you held your reps as accountable as your fellow voters.

        • FreakinSteve@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          Democrats CONTINUE to enforce and support the unpopular, treasonous, ineffectual leadership. We can talk about Schumer’s bad choice all day long but it means nothing if he is never ever ever ever ever “held accountable” for it. They literally stuck an old fossil with cancer in the DNC chair versus the clearly obvious choice that gets things done and excites the voters. He literally ran a PRO-TRUMP Democrat to unseat McConnell when all the energy was behind Charles Booker.

          Young voters and progressives do not believe in anything you say because there is no will to back it up. They get stabbed in the face over and over and over and over and over again.

          As for the good policies that Dems enacted? They’re easily dismantled or else undermined by administrative excess, handing power back to the GOP. Case in point: FEMA and the Lahaina fire relief. FEMA swooped in to help house the displaced; to do this they paid $9000/month in rent to anyone that would help house the victims. All of our rents went up ASTRONOMICALLY because FEMA far exceeded the market rate, leading to more homelessness even for those NOT displaced by the fire. Landlords got RICH AS FUUUUUCK on the taxpayer dime.

        • schema@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I agree with you and like to emphasis on one point you already mentioned. The demcrats encompass everything to the left of the GOP. Because the GOP is far right, everything to the left of it includes center right, conservatives, centrist and liberal opinions, as well as a lot, or most of the left wing depending on definitions.

          In my opinion this is one of the major reasons why the democrats seem so undecicive, because there already are so many different world views of people that are forced to be in the same party, because effectively, there only are two of them, and the alternative is straight up fascism.

          If the democrats ever regain power, changing the voting system to allow for a 3rd or 4th party to actually emerge would be a saving grace, but unfortunately, the above mentioned composition will likely prevent them from it, even when in power. And on top of that they will have their hands full with the debt crisis.

      • Muad'dib@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        21 hours ago

        You’ve fallen for Democrat propaganda. They want you to think they can’t be taken seriously. They want to lose.

    • shads@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      22 hours ago

      From my detached non American (but still a citizen of the planet so likely to get fucked hard by the way Americans vote) point of view, seems like Americans are continually letting perfect be the enemy of least bad. “Well since Democrats are kinda bad in these instances maybe we should just go fully fascist theological doom cult. That will force the Democrats to improve, or kill us all.”

      • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        19 hours ago

        American here…I think it’s actually more the opposite. Everyone is being told to vote for the lessor evil and no one is getting what they want. That’s what caused all this to begin with imo… The Magas torched their party trying to get something different to happen politically (not to excuse them or anyone). This is all on the 2 party system, if we make it out of this I think ending that system is one major change that will need to take place to avoid repeating the cycle. Basically, we lost our Republic a long time ago when Congress stopped representing us and became owned by billionaires.

        • shads@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          I have written and rewritten my response here trying to find the right tone. I feel like we are closer to agreement here than might be immediately obvious. I think a lot of what we are seeing now is a result of 50+ years of people who find the idea of your republic distasteful seeking every method they can to erode it away. All the details are just components of this project, seems to me that MAGA is a result of years of stoking xenophobia and anti-intellectualism. Turns out if you spend decades laying the groundwork you can make the situation seem completely hopeless to a whole populace. I sincerely worry the long term goal is to perfect the formula for dismantling democracy and then start exporting it to the rest of the world.

          Or I could be a fool, I don’t know and I don’t want to rewrite this again. Sorry that this was so rambling.

    • Muad'dib@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      21 hours ago

      It’s called controlled opposition. The Democratic party has a lot of passionate, honest people, who want to make the world a better place. But they’re funded and directed at the highest levels of leadership by a group that secretly wants to make the world a worse place.

      And the way they accomplish that is making sure the passionate honest people lose. Kamala Harris was bragging about drilling for oil and staying quiet about Gaza because either she or the people giving her advice wanted her to lose.

      “Both sides bad” is the party’s intended messaging strategy. And it’s a lie. But it’s a lie people are falling for and repeating.

    • Delphia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Ive always put it in the very crude fashion of “They are both going to fuck us, but one of them spits on it and goes in gentle the other one wants us to struggle.”

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Personally, I’d go with the idea that the Democrats are the ones who fight for brightly-colored warning signs, guardrails, and PPE for the operators of the orphan crushing machine.

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      shitty children petulantly whining they never get their way.

      mind you, “their way” would alienate more than 60% of voters

      no party is perfect, but they are wholly deluded and will lash out like spurned tweens denied their crocks. they know conservatives don’t give two flying fucks about them, so they have to lash out at dems / liberals / anyone not sufficiently ML to stand up to their purity tests.

      it would be hilarious academically, but their bullshit does real world harm.

    • hansolo
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      23 hours ago

      The more accurate form of the comment to which you’re reacting would be:

      Can I have a free beer?

      Conservatives: No

      Liberals: Points to novelty sign on wall Free Beer Tomorrow winks “so you want a beer today? That’ll be $8.99”

      The results aren’t exactly the same, but the gulf is not meaningful is the problem. Realistically, most people don’t actually like either party, they just dislike the other party more. If one day we had a 7 random parties just appear and Rs and Ds vanish, for a solid 20 years, political discourse would be verdant and nuanced in a way rarely seen in the US.

      • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Ooof that fact that you think the “gulf is not meaningful” is insane.

        I mean JFC, are you blind or a troll? I don’t even have enough time to list the Nazi level illegal and democracy ending shit Trump is doing right now.

        • hansolo
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          Lol, I have two degrees in studying this, and I’m old enough to have seen the full cycle play out a few times for both sides. I’m not trolling, I’m jaded AF. And I’m taking about what either party does as a party line. Orange Bully is obviously different, but it’s an individual thing, nothing the party itself has accomplished or done.

          Look, if the difference was so vast, ask yourself why Schumer and all the other 70+ year old Dems seem hellbent on laying low and doing nothing but maintain their own power? Maybe get a couple seats in 2026? That’s not resistance. That’s capitulation. Not even strategic capitulation, simply consent and wishes for crumbs. The same thing the alt-right does because TACO boy always chickens out when it comes to a “crossing the Rubicon” style move.

          Political parties only exist to enrich and entrench politicians in the party. They are unions for politicians, with no benefits passed to the voters unless it first benefits the politicians. Open your eyes. If you think either party is so noble and steadfast and true, ask yourself where, in a time of need, they are.

          Edit: I’m a privacy advocate, and so you have shit like this: https://lemmy.today/post/31901334. While on the other side, journalist Taylor Lorenz has repeatedly mentioned that during a social media influencer event the Biden White House held, they pushed for the idea of “unmasking internet trolls,” which by default means knowing who everyone is online. (The most recent episode of Power User mentions it again) This, the slow deterioration from a few Senators in 2017-18 trying for an internet bill of rights, down to not a bill but…principles, down to privacy as a consumer right, down to F it we need tech bro money too so scrap it all and let’s support Digital IDs now (https://www.meritalk.com/articles/congress-warms-to-digital-ids-as-fraud-privacy-concerns-grow/)

          Plenty of examples of both parties having incredibly similar implementations of two different sounding policy goals. Which is fascinating to read about, but a terrifying place in which to live.

        • NewSocialWhoDis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Attacking the commenter personally is not helpful. Obviously the whole destruction-of-American-Democracy thing is very different. But let’s look at some salient issues.

          As far as the war in Gaza, Biden/ establishment Democrats still stood behind Netanyahu in the wake of Oct 7th. There was only slight functional differences in Biden’s America’s stance on Israel in Gaza and Trump’s.

          Less salient, adding a cap on mortgage interest deductions on taxes. Republicans under Trump I did it to punish wealthy coastal (high home value) residents who rented to vote blue. Democrats left it in place because they approved of people who have more home value paying more taxes.

          It goes on. Both Democrats and Republicans failed to close Guantanamo, advance voting reform, advance marijuana legalization, end the war in Afghanistan, or take ANY action about climate change for decades, etc.

          It’s not every issue mind you, but Democrats are frustratingly adherent to the status quo while the United States has needed meaningful reform for decades.