The Pennsylvania Democrat recalled his time serving as a Hillary Clinton surrogate in 2016, even after he supported Bernie Sanders in the primary.

  • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel like this is the new boogie man for the DNC. My close circle of friends all don’t like Joe Biden, all voted for Bernie in the primary against Hilary. Still showed up to vote for both her and Biden.

    There’s plenty of people who didn’t show up for Biden and Hilary that have similar views and I don’t think it’s as much malicious as it is apathetic. They don’t do enough to give them a reason to show up. They don’t “energize the base” well enough. The Democrats need to get people excited for their policies somehow.

    • ALostInquirer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Democrats need to get people excited for their policies somehow.

      Wouldn’t a good way to do that be to have compelling policies? Off the top of my head I’d think putting abortion protections/rights into explicit law would be a start. Frankly anything that is currently only legal on the basis of supreme court decisions also seems ripe for putting into legislative policy pushes to make into explicit legal protections, rather than relying on some decision that may be overturned by an arguably compromised court.

      In that vein, expanding protections to the LGBT+ community would be another good piece to their policies. Also, on a larger note, more explicit and enthusiastic support of active unionization efforts that have been happening across different business sectors.

      However, even beyond these, some that would apply more broadly might be policies to address housing and rent costs, as these affect basically everyone and anyone. Policies seeking to address housing/rent, education, and healthcare costs would altogether, I think, speak to a wider swath of the public than strictly focusing on the aforementioned concerns, but would also include them, e.g. combating redlining, undermining of public education, denial of medical services to pregnant women & trans people, etc.

      I’ll admit, maybe they have been pushing for some different parts of these (I’m aware of the Biden administration sort of trying to address college debt and getting screwed by the courts), but by and large I don’t think I’ve seen a clear set of policies by the Democratic party of the United States to be excited for. Far more of it has appeared rather watered down and more along the lines of, “Well, we’re not the Republicans at least!” instead of enthusiastically standing for something more constructive.

      • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m not against any of those policy points you listed. But none of them would get me nearly as excited as them actually following through on raising taxes on the wealthy. They haven’t even really attempted that in decades. It’s been all cuts by the Republicans with no action from the Democrats. Making priority one rolling back the tax bill passed under Trump which lowered taxes on the wealthy and raised them on the middle class would of made me excited to vote for Biden again.

        To me, this is supposed to be the main difference between the two parties and how they run the country. Social issues are important, but I’m sick of the media and politicians ignoring fiscal/tax policy. Biden throws out a soundbite about taxing the rich and being pro labor every once and a while, but makes zero action that way.

        • ALostInquirer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Social issues are important, but I’m sick of the media and politicians ignoring fiscal/tax policy. Biden throws out a soundbite about taxing the rich and being pro labor every once and a while, but makes zero action that way.

          Fwiw that’s why I included the parts regarding policies addressing various costs (housing/rent, education, healthcare).

          Ideally taxing the rich would lead to actions addressing those, but if we’re realistic, the odds are just as likely for those tax revenues to go to subsidizing some other businesses, and the military, with a depressingly low amount allocated towards public domestic concerns like helping provide shelter, education, and healthcare. At least, the odds are likely they’ll go that way if not coupled with policies of using the tax revenues towards domestic efforts.

    • GodlessCommie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It has nothing to do with energizing the base when we can see they lure voters to the polls then never deliver. The issues the poor and middle class are facing now are the same issues we’ve been facing for decades, and they never get addressed.

      Like James Baldwin said, ‘I can’t believe what you say, because I see what you do.’

      • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        They could energize the base, by actually doing something they want pretty easily. Legalize pot, raise taxes on the wealthy, codify abortion/roe vs Wade into law… like anything people actually care about.

          • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Things the Republicans might also do and isn’t a good thing to run on for 1,000 Pat. Didn’t Bush pass some decent prescription drug bill…