980
submitted 2 weeks ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 128 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

There’s an alternate timeline where Bernie won in 2016 and restored the middle class in America. Living wages, affordable housing, affordable everything, universal healthcare, and a common sense foreign policy.

I’m not saying he’s perfect. He would have made mistakes. But he would have been the best president since FDR.

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 114 points 2 weeks ago

There’s an alternate timeline where he wins and can’t get anything through because there aren’t enough progressive Dems in the senate.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 57 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

So the same as if any other Democrat won but unlike the other Democrats, at least he would have still tried?

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago

Or where upon it seems he'll be blocked, he goes individually to each of the blocking members states or districts, and campaigns his ideas directly to those who will be most affected, both upsetting precedent and dra international attention to individuals blocking the legislation.

You act like there wasn't a plan. I assure you , there was a plan.

[-] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 weeks ago

Being in a position where the entire country hears his very reasonable, very easy to understand words over and over again would eventually have an effect. Even the die-hards would eventually be asking themselves if it is in fact reasonable that corporations are assfucking each and every one of us every single day. Some of them would vote in a more progressive representative.

Would he get everything passed? Absolutely not. But he would get some good stuff through.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Being in a position where the entire country hears his very reasonable, very easy to understand words over and over again would eventually have an effect.

How did that work out for Jimmy Carter?

[-] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago

It worked out pretty well for Carter's policies, even if he only got one term. Carter ran openly as a centrist, and his fiscal conservatism was very popular. The left-ish wing of the Democratic party started an "Anybody But Carter" campaign during the primaries for exactly that reason. Lots of policies he advocated for got passed during his presidency: he deregulated the airlines, the trucking industry, railroads, banking - and that was a great trial run for Reagan's followups (and Bush, and Clinton, and W).

But Carter was both too conservative and wildly incompetent for the job. With somewhat liberal Dems having the majority in both houses and universal health care being a big issue at the time, and with Ted Kennedy as majority leader trying to push it through, Carter still opposed it on the basis of cost. Of course it died, as did any other progressive or even moderately liberal ideas that cost money.

What I'm saying is fuck Carter. He's done a great job rehabbing his image but he was a bad president his presidency is rightfully maligned by both the right and the left. But he got a lot of policies through that he liked.

[-] SandbagTiara2816@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago

That’s all really interesting, i need to learn more. I don’t know tons about Carter, but I do know he put solar panels on the White House in the 70s, which is pretty rad. Of course Reagan took them right off, that fucker

[-] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, his alternative energy push was definitely positive, he just didn't have the political capital or savvy to make anything of it. He admittedly walked into a pretty raw deal with stagflation and an energy crisis, but he handled them so poorly it's hard to justify cutting him any slack. Telling the public energy is in short supply so they're going to have to make sacrifices is a losing strategy no matter what you're advocating for.

[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 weeks ago

In that case, Bernie’s executive orders would have blotted out the sun. How do courts strike down student loans being forgiven under a new legal theory every month?

[-] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

It doesn't take too many traitors to the party to ruin any attempts at passing progressive legislation sadly. Even if it's not the usual suspects like Sinema or Manchin someone will always step up, and if they don't get voted back into office later then they'll just cash in those connections with a lobbying firm.

[-] SandbagTiara2816@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

If i remember right, he said if he won he would go to places like WV and hold rallies demanding senators help his agenda or he’d back their primary challengers. That’s the kind of guts I’d like to have seen

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

And yet it's a better timeline than what happened when Clinton was too bad at being a politician to beat Trump.

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

In no timeline would it be worse though.

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Ha. This guy hasn’t heard of nukes

load more comments (5 replies)
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2024
980 points (98.2% liked)

News

22854 readers
3418 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS