530
Okay, Biden isn’t popular. But his policies sure are.
(www.washingtonpost.com)
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 02 Jul 2024
530 points (93.7% liked)
politics
19090 readers
3976 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
It should be mentioned that the people he appointed to the NLRB have been hugely positive for union activity and power. Even with the railroad thing (which they did end up getting concessions on) Biden is still the most pro union president in our lifetimes.
They also passed the largest climate bill ever.
The GOP has blocked every single attempt at improving the ACA and has tried to repeal it dozens of times.
Can you point to a someone who hasn't? Congress routinely increases military spending without the military even requesting more funding.
I get that half measures don't feel like wins, but when half the government is controlled by people who want to destroy it, they are. If we want sweeping legislation that fixes more issues, we have to strip enough power from the GOP to make it possible. Until we do that, half measures are really all we can hope for. We elect people because of their platform, and then we don't give them enough votes to pass legislation. I'm not saying the Democrats/Biden are flawless here, but we have to live in reality.
They ran a hell of marketing on this, a non-rail union, that voted against the strike, made a statement that some rail workers got some sick days. Not all of them, not as much as they could have gotten, and most importantly of all, like i said, their bargaining power for the future is ruined.
Ironically thats the same bill Im referring to. Again, they did great marketing.
Like i said, they did make changes to it. No attempt was made to fix the poor americans not getting any help.
Doesnt change anything
Okay I get that you don't find those particular changes to be good enough, and I would agree with you. That doesnt make them lazy, and they're still the best chance we have. And you're completely ignoring the structural obstacles that they literally don't have the votes to overcome, even if every single Democrat in Congress agreed.
If we had given the Democrats a fillibuster proof majority and the White House for more than 2 months in the past couple decades I'd agree with you. But we haven't done our job well enough here, just as much as they haven't done theirs well enough. Framing the entire party as a lost cause and ineffective without looking at all the reasons why only hurts us.
ETA: I do believe the ACA and the IRA were absolutely worthwhile and have positive benefits. Just because you don't like parts of the bill doesn't mean they aren't.
I dont think my opinions are what you think they are. I havent called anyone lazy, im not criticizing democrats for not doing enough, theyve done a lot, a lot of harm. The story isnt republicans wanted to break the rail strike and democrats didnt stop them, the democrats outlawed the strike! They passed the IRA with zero republican votes, and still included millions of acres in federal land leasing explicitly for oil and gas extraction.
Oh apologies I misunderstood your position. I'm not really interested in listening to how any objectively good thing the Democrats do is actually bad regardless of context, which appears to be your position on most things, so have a nice day!
Regardless of context? I dont think youve looked into any of these topics beyond headlines.
You would be incorrect, that's okay though.