Normally I’d agree, but they have the opportunity to move further left and claim “party of the working class”, especially considering Biden’s public support of the UAW
And to add to that, the national labor relations board under the Biden admin had been making important favorable rulings for workers and making it easier to form unions.
I’d much rather have democrats running that department than Republicans. Who gets appointed to lead these agencies matters. Maybe not quite as much as congress, but still very important.
Unironically, as long as it doesn’t negatively affect my portfolio, I stand by anything that helps working people like me. Strong unions built this country and there’s no reason auto stocks can’t continue to prosper with a strong UAW.
All we need to do is bomb the rest of the world into the Stone Age like in WW2, so that they have no recourse but to buy our industrial goods, and we can have a strong and unionized workforce just like in the 50s-70s.
If they wanted to be the party of the working class, they would have imposed the rail union’s demands on the rail bosses. Instead, they made sure they couldn’t strike.
The topic here is senate Democrats. Biden isn’t in the senate, and as centrists are so fond of saying when they justify the party’s mistreatment of Sanders in the 2016 primary, Sanders isn’t a Democrat.
No. You don’t get to reassign what the topic is about because it’s better for your pessimistic view. Biden is the de facto leader of the Democratic party. What he does is incredibly important for the direction of the party as a whole, and therefore senate democrats.
You don’t get to reassign what the topic is about because it’s better for your pessimistic view.
Article’s about Senate Democrats. Senate Democrats made sure rail bosses got what they wanted. What Biden and Sanders did afterwards to try to mitigate the betrayal of Senate Democrats is not something Senate Democrats should be given credit for.
You don’t get to stab workers in the back like Senate Democrats did and then get credit for the work people who aren’t Senate Democrats put in.
The comment I wrote was about the democratic party as a whole. It’s never just the senate, just the house, or just the president when a party moves left.
It’s never just the senate, just the house, or just the president when a party moves left.
Then you’re also willing to give the entire party credit when they move right, too? Like how the entire party killed BBB? Like how the entire party killed the minimum wage increase? Like how the entire party supports Netanyahu’s genocide? Manchin voted to confirm Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, so the entire party helped kill Roe v Wade.
If you want to give the entire party credit for the accomplishments of people who aren’t even party members like Sanders, we can certainly go there. Lieberman wasn’t a party member, so the entire party killed the public option.
Then you’re also willing to give the entire party credit when they move right, too?
Yes. The democratic party is a progressive, liberal party. That means they’re still right of center and make many moves that hurt the working class. But they’ve also been moving left since the 40s. In my state, the democratic party absorbed the Farmer-Labor party and moved significantly more left as a result. They’re still more left than the rest of the nation imo. But because they’re still primarily a liberal party, their progress is slow.
Agreed, as optics are concerned. But in the end I think the workers got what they were asking for. It just didn’t make for exciting news so wasn’t covered in the media.
They have many opportunities to move left. They don’t. They never do. Why? Because Democrats are not leftists or progressives.They don’t WANT to move left just like they don’t WANT big changes to happen.
You are asking for a dog to enjoy a salad.
Note I’d still enjoy it if they weren’t completely stupid “enlightened centrists”, but that’s what Democrats are. They specifically are NOT agressive with progress on any front, including worker rights and pay.
They are “moving left” because people who are not Democrats have to join the party to have any hope of winning anything.
That does not mean Democrats are happy about people trying to pull them left, nor does that mean they will accept any of this at a party platform level, nor does it mean they will ACTUALLY fight for anything.
Remember: Democrats’ big win in the 2010’s was … passing a Republican health care plan from the 90’s. Hillary wanted a slow transition to GAS instead of clean energy.
Democrats are not and never will be truly progressive. Ever. It is literally antithetical to their ideology. They are a baby-steps party. They are “enlightened centrists”, and will always have the problems that ignorant position entails.
That doesn’t mean we should ignore them or not use their party. It just means once the Republicans have lost power, don’t be surprised if it takes creating a party to the left of Democrats to get anything serious changed.
absolutely, I 100% agree. The democrats in MN and MI didn’t move left because they wanted to, they moved left because if they didn’t then their constituents would be pissed. It’s also worth pointing out that the progressive policies passed in those states didn’t have anything less than 70% support. Keeping and hoarding power is the only reason establishment parties do anything, and we should never forget that. They have a useful framework that can be pretty easily co-opted from the local level. The work done by independents and progressive third parties are just as important as hijacking the democratic party for a leftist agenda, but we should be prepared to drop them like a turd the moment the Republican party falls into total insolvency.
Yea. Unfortunately with the two party system, we literally HAVE to go through Democrats to get any power.
Which makes it all the more important to always remember that Democrats are not allies to progressives when progressives are the other party. Democrats actually like a slow ineffectual government.
Normally I’d agree, but they have the opportunity to move further left and claim “party of the working class”, especially considering Biden’s public support of the UAW
And to add to that, the national labor relations board under the Biden admin had been making important favorable rulings for workers and making it easier to form unions.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/what-are-top-3-labor-law-developments-2023-so-far
I’d much rather have democrats running that department than Republicans. Who gets appointed to lead these agencies matters. Maybe not quite as much as congress, but still very important.
Just as long as it doesn’t endanger “the economy”, at least.
As always, “the economy” is a synonym for “rich people’s yacht money.”
Unironically, as long as it doesn’t negatively affect my portfolio, I stand by anything that helps working people like me. Strong unions built this country and there’s no reason auto stocks can’t continue to prosper with a strong UAW.
All we need to do is bomb the rest of the world into the Stone Age like in WW2, so that they have no recourse but to buy our industrial goods, and we can have a strong and unionized workforce just like in the 50s-70s.
Fuck your portfolio.
Fuck you retirement is important
If it comes down to workers not being exploited versus the value of your portfolio, fuck your portfolio.
If they wanted to be the party of the working class, they would have imposed the rail union’s demands on the rail bosses. Instead, they made sure they couldn’t strike.
It was extremely quiet, but after the terrible contract was pushed through, Bernie and Biden worked behind the scenes to get most rail workers the sick time they were fighting for. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/01/railroad-workers-union-win-sick-leave
The topic here is senate Democrats. Biden isn’t in the senate, and as centrists are so fond of saying when they justify the party’s mistreatment of Sanders in the 2016 primary, Sanders isn’t a Democrat.
No. You don’t get to reassign what the topic is about because it’s better for your pessimistic view. Biden is the de facto leader of the Democratic party. What he does is incredibly important for the direction of the party as a whole, and therefore senate democrats.
I would also bet that party leadership was fully aware of the plan to continue negotiations behind the scenes.
Article’s about Senate Democrats. Senate Democrats made sure rail bosses got what they wanted. What Biden and Sanders did afterwards to try to mitigate the betrayal of Senate Democrats is not something Senate Democrats should be given credit for.
You don’t get to stab workers in the back like Senate Democrats did and then get credit for the work people who aren’t Senate Democrats put in.
The comment I wrote was about the democratic party as a whole. It’s never just the senate, just the house, or just the president when a party moves left.
Then you’re also willing to give the entire party credit when they move right, too? Like how the entire party killed BBB? Like how the entire party killed the minimum wage increase? Like how the entire party supports Netanyahu’s genocide? Manchin voted to confirm Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, so the entire party helped kill Roe v Wade.
If you want to give the entire party credit for the accomplishments of people who aren’t even party members like Sanders, we can certainly go there. Lieberman wasn’t a party member, so the entire party killed the public option.
Yes. The democratic party is a progressive, liberal party. That means they’re still right of center and make many moves that hurt the working class. But they’ve also been moving left since the 40s. In my state, the democratic party absorbed the Farmer-Labor party and moved significantly more left as a result. They’re still more left than the rest of the nation imo. But because they’re still primarily a liberal party, their progress is slow.
Agreed, as optics are concerned. But in the end I think the workers got what they were asking for. It just didn’t make for exciting news so wasn’t covered in the media.
Did they, though? They ended up with like one sick day that’s not even paid. They still got completely fucked on several fronts.
I just read that they got 4 paid days.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/01/railroad-workers-union-win-sick-leave
We’re talking about senate democrats here. Not Biden.
It seems that they played a longer game and it worked out, but the optics were not great.
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
IBEW seem convinced that Biden and his adminstration were helpful.
Article’s about senate Democrats, who were happy to make sure that the workers couldn’t strike.
They have many opportunities to move left. They don’t. They never do. Why? Because Democrats are not leftists or progressives.They don’t WANT to move left just like they don’t WANT big changes to happen.
You are asking for a dog to enjoy a salad.
Note I’d still enjoy it if they weren’t completely stupid “enlightened centrists”, but that’s what Democrats are. They specifically are NOT agressive with progress on any front, including worker rights and pay.
The party is slowly moving left though towards SocDem, especially on the state level. Look at Minnesota and Michigan for evidence.
They are “moving left” because people who are not Democrats have to join the party to have any hope of winning anything.
That does not mean Democrats are happy about people trying to pull them left, nor does that mean they will accept any of this at a party platform level, nor does it mean they will ACTUALLY fight for anything.
Remember: Democrats’ big win in the 2010’s was … passing a Republican health care plan from the 90’s. Hillary wanted a slow transition to GAS instead of clean energy.
Democrats are not and never will be truly progressive. Ever. It is literally antithetical to their ideology. They are a baby-steps party. They are “enlightened centrists”, and will always have the problems that ignorant position entails.
That doesn’t mean we should ignore them or not use their party. It just means once the Republicans have lost power, don’t be surprised if it takes creating a party to the left of Democrats to get anything serious changed.
absolutely, I 100% agree. The democrats in MN and MI didn’t move left because they wanted to, they moved left because if they didn’t then their constituents would be pissed. It’s also worth pointing out that the progressive policies passed in those states didn’t have anything less than 70% support. Keeping and hoarding power is the only reason establishment parties do anything, and we should never forget that. They have a useful framework that can be pretty easily co-opted from the local level. The work done by independents and progressive third parties are just as important as hijacking the democratic party for a leftist agenda, but we should be prepared to drop them like a turd the moment the Republican party falls into total insolvency.
Yea. Unfortunately with the two party system, we literally HAVE to go through Democrats to get any power.
Which makes it all the more important to always remember that Democrats are not allies to progressives when progressives are the other party. Democrats actually like a slow ineffectual government.