I don't know if he likes the US or not. I assume he does.

The point he was making is the main stream democratic party is terrible right now. And it's a fair (and obvious) point. But I could be wrong. 2022 is right around the corner and we'll get to see.

Okay, my point was that his criticism was mostly just about how America sucks, not anything specific to mainstream Democrats. He says his post is an observation about how terrible the mainstream Democratic party is, but then just lists a bunch of things he thinks shows that America and Americans suck in general and then claims that Biden is a representative of this suckitude because his supporters don't think there is anything wrong with the US. Fine, whatever, I'm not that concerned if you dislike the US, but you have to have lived in a cave for the last 5 years if you think Democrats, mainstream or otherwise, don't think there is anything wrong with America.

I've lived in a cave for several decades and still, when I first went into it Joe Biden was already in the senate working hard to cooperate with the Republicans and other Democratic pirates. He's certainly not as horrible as Trump, but Trump haters misunderstimate how much of the problem is the USA s degenerating culture, which is decadent rich whiners complianinf that black and Chinese people don't work for free anymore. Biden will slow the plummet to oligarchic russian style democracy, but not as much as some seem to think.

This is what I mean, the great diverse myth is believed even by progressive mathematicians

I'm so pumped for 4 years of Fox News trying this **** like we're all just gonna forget the Trump Administration and not laugh in their faces

Tan Suit Szn

So now Biden's sin is working with Republicans and conservative/moderate Democrats as a Senator? Good for him. I prefer legislators who want to pass legislation, which typically requires bipartisan support.

The left and right both wear their inability to get things done like a badge of honor. The difference being the right doesn’t actually want things done. The left are just a bunch of suckers.

Biden does love to be perceived as the guy who can get bipartisan support.

of course the devil is in the details as it is only valuable, to your side if you are not giving on all your key points to get the other side to agree.

Biden has been accused of bending far to the GOP side of issues to achieve that support, as I think his natural inclination is to the right of the Dem spectrum to begin with.

Proof will be in the pudding this time, so I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.

This isn't the only potential upside. The perception of Biden as a backslapper willing to work with Republicans is also a positive for Democrats in that it makes it more likely that the media will blame Republicans for obstruction when legislation doesn't pass.

Not so sure on that.

It can easily also be perceived as 'see Republicans are not that hard to work with as long as you have a Dem willing to compromise', and then the claim of 'this item not passing is just proof the Dems are not compromising here as we have proved we will compromise when one is offered in the past'.

Not sure how this supports your point, but the US is a pretty average country in terms of religious diversity according to Pew's Religious Diversity Index. And that index uses 2010 numbers - we have gotten more diverse since then. And I'd argue that their index underestimates America's religious diversity because what I'd guess is a higher than average diversity within Christianity.

Wasn't aware that US religious diversity was a bragging point for either Americans or progressives. I'll brag about how America has one of the best legal regimes protecting freedom of religion, but that is different from diversity.

Sure, I'm only claiming it makes it more likely that Republicans get blamed for obstruction, not that it is a certainty.

My worry is that a lot of effort will be put on diluting the leverage points democrats have (for example attempting to do legislative things vs executive things) in the name of being able to work with mitch mcconnell and pass bipartisan things, only for the GOP to intentionally throw as much sand in the mechanism and it to accomplish nothing.

This is similar to the first two years under obama. Obamacare was priority #1, and was arguably substantially diluted despite ultimately getting zero GOP senators on board, but perhaps more importantly most of the second priority stuff ended up getting shuffled out of the first two years as the attempts at GOP engagement just completely failed. Now the dynamics are different in that GOP has the senate, but I still am very nervous.

You do know what he worked together with repubs and Dems on right? Incarcerating a generation of minorities and starting a war that killed millions of innocents.

Jesus blue maga is a helluva drug

An actual criticism of Biden. Yep, the 94 Crime Bill was a mistake, and so was his 2002 vote for war in Iraq.

You were shitting yourself in 1994, and for all I know you may still be, but Joe seems to have moved on from his former *oh my god* mistakes.

You think there is a tradeoff here between executive and legislative action? My view is that they mostly run alongside each other, and executive action is typically taken when there is no hope of legislative action since it is so much more easily overturned.

I don't really worry about diluting leverage points much myself. More or less, if we pass legislation over the next few years is mostly up to Republican Senators, not the Democratic President. Biden has little leverage over them that I see, even less than Obama did.

I am actually not convinced that the establishment Dems are not happy having 'The Republican's would not let us do it' as an excuse.

i think they know, for instance if they get the Senate, the push to be more Left and really try to make big and bold initiatives will be strong. I think they are happy with things largely are with just a few reversals of some major Trump EO but not a lot more and they can do that with or without the Senate.

I honestly think if they wanted to really win the Senate it could be as near a slam dunk as possible by simply bribing voters. Saying in every single instance 'by Feb15th (or whatever is earliest possible date), if we take these two Senate seats we will immediate pass another relief bill that will put X thousand dollars in each of your pockets as part of a new relief package.

Make the number obnoxiously large, so that Mitch and crew have no other choice but to oppose it.

it is a no brainer for Dems. Buys votes and the economy at the beginning of Bidens term gets a real kick start.

For some reasons the Dem's are not doing it and i hate to think it, but I do think they really do not want a mandate that would see them pushed to make big, grand changes.

Okay. I've seen a bunch of progressives and conservatives make this claim about mainstream Democrats, but not any actual mainstream Democrats make it, so I'm skeptical. It certainly isn't my view. My guess is this speculation is based on the false view that mainstream Democrats don't have political convictions because they don't have progressive political convictions.

Chuck Schumer definitely wants to be Majority Leader. Your view is that he'd rather not have a majority in the Senate? I think you are drastically underestimating how hard it is to win an election and that the reason Democrats lost in the Senate (probably) is because in purple states more voters preferred Republicans to both progressive and mainstream Democrats. I know there is this myth that some progressives have about how actually everyone just wants progressive policies and if you would just run on them you would win, EZ game. This is false, as is obvious from actual election results. I mean, what about the last two presidential elections tells you that lots of voters don't support Republicans and their policies?

They think the only thing wrong with America is that it's not still 1993 and people are easily conned into buying their neo-libera BS.

Still juice in that orange though. It's been a good run.

I think it is fair to say the establishment Dems have two Masters and the louder one is their corporate donors.

I do not think that is an inflammatory statement. They take a ton of money that is key to them getting elected and from many who have supported them thru many campaigns.

Those donors on the Dem side accept some shifts to the left but want it small and incremental. Sure raise the minimum wage and implement some health care reform but incrementally. Many support Republicans too and are ok with massive shifts to the right (ie Trump tax cuts). And then the increments back to towards the left but as long as the general direction is continually to the right over time.

I think that is why the bulk of voters stay home and have given up on politics and the politicians have gone from 'Most Trusted' to 'Least Trusted' in society as voters learned, over time, that they were promised one thing in the campaign, to get their votes, and yet the politicians acted as if they were answering to another master, with a defend agenda once in power.




Like I said, this election is the Dem's to buy. People will vote for self interest when you make it really clear. The Dem's midterms were proof of that with the cry of 'Pre-existing conditions will be lost'. People got up and voted to protect it as it was crystal clear what was at stake.

The Dem's should be on that singular type note now. X thousand dollars in your pocket within Y days after we win. Your check will be mailed, we will be asking your banks and landlords to not act in the interim.

Everything should be around that note. I do not see how they could lose, honestly. Make it so the election is NOT about the 2 candidates at all and the perception about them. Make it so much bigger than either of them to the electorate.

In 94 I was 1 year away fr9m old enough to get life in jail for a dimebag.

That's like saying an actor who plays the role of a sucker is a sucker in real life.

In real life he got paid.

That kid isn't a progressive.