466
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
466 points (98.5% liked)
politics
19159 readers
4212 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Idk, it feels manipulative to me. All they've done here is follow through on existing policy. I have higher standards for being impressed than doing what you're required to do, even if others before you failed to do so.
Proving that you can and do follow through on existing policy is still a good thing to do.
Sure, but that's the bare minimum. That's not going to inspire apathetic voters. Claiming credit for a Democratic Congress / George W Bush admin era piece of legislation is not very impressive.
Especially since the Democrats passed it with a 49+2 / 49 majority in the Senate (and filibustering still very much a thing), so it's a stark contrast to all the stuff they claimed wasn't possible during the Biden admin because they simply didn't have a strong enough majority in the Senate even without a Republican president. I know times are different now, but it kind of paints a circle around the lack of legislative backbone this administration has had.
I don't really care. I don't necessarily agree, but even if I did, I don't care at this point.
Well... I'm responding to you saying they should use this to get young people to vote. I'm saying that's not a good idea because it's manipulative and only serves to highlight all the ways they haven't followed through on student loan debt, instead they keep touting tiny band aids and legislation signed into law by Bush Jr.
Almost feels like you're saying that if people do the exact job you put them there to do, that's not good enough for them to keep their jobs.
It is, of course. So they get my vote.
Uh, no. That's pretty clearly not what I'm saying.
I'm saying I expect my government to do more than simply follow through on 17 year old laws and pretend like that's some amazing achievement. And student loans in particular have been abysmally handled by Biden, both in his Senate career and his failed promises to the populace when running for president.
"But the Supreme Court": yes, but they were a known obstacle and he still chose to delay any attempt for two years in order to try to double dip, which still ultimately failed. He knowingly left the people with crushing student loan debt to suffer while waiting for a politically expedient time to even try. And he failed anyway, so why wait?
Well we've got two options. Vote for them or not. Which would you recommend people do?
Vote, but don't be complacent. The Democrats do not adequately work for the needs of the people.
Donate or volunteer for local progressives during the primaries, fight like hell to make your government fight for you. And do not accept mediocrity as a victory.
You are aiming too high. Simply getting people to vote is already a lot because our general election turnout is shameful. Beyond that, primary voting turnout is like abysmal, I think 10% or so last I checked.
Getting primary election turnout up will make the biggest difference in party attitude for the least effort expended.
Being nit picky and pedantic will just get people to grumble and move on to other things.
Be short, to the point, and make the effort you are asking for to be so negligible that people will feel compelled to do that much.
Otherwise you just defeat your own causes by introducing friction that bleeds momentum and energy. Pessimism isn't effective at galvanizing the left. The left thrives on optimism.
I agree the left thrives on optimism, which is why I'm especially unhappy with the Democratic Party in the last 10 years. They've done absolutely nothing to make people optimistic. Instead of leaning into the enthusiasm that Bernie drummed up, they played dirty and launched a smear campaign. And they've followed that up with 8 years of nothing but "you have to vote for us because what else are you gonna do?"
They call milquetoast achievements like "we didn't fail to follow through on policy passed 17 years ago" great accomplishments and think that's good enough to inspire optimism? Give me a break.