this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2025
669 points (95.8% liked)
People Twitter
6621 readers
943 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Bro literally demonstrably didn't because caucusing independent Joe Lieberman voted against Public Option leaving the DNC dead in the water with 59 and a Republican Filibuster. The DNC count was 58 + 2 ind, and only for 72 days.
Here's an article from 2009 that analyzes this point about the White House during the 111th Congress bit: https://www.politico.com/story/2009/12/what-if-obama-hadnt-ostracized-dean-030752
Obama White House worked against itself on healthcare reform during that time period. Actively. Lieberman was essentially helping the White House's mission.
Some of us who were fighting that fight back then haven't forgotten or willfully pulled the wool over our eyes when the turn happened. Some of us were still pissed about abortion disappearing from legistlative priorities immediately after the election.
This ridiculous trend of people linking one or multiple opinion articles is as fucking annoying as Tankies leaving a giant wall of text pulling from various manifestos, you've basically done the same thing with an added middleman. A bunch of what-ifs and hypotheticals doesn't change the facts. Getting 58 DNC senators wasn't enough but it was still a huge accomplishment, and this "all or nothing" approach to reform is just childish. Just because Obama didn't give Dean a bunch of positions doesn't indicate any acts of malice, and his actual choice for HHS, Kathleen Sebelius was also a supporter for Public Option.
Overturning SCOTUS decisions isn't as simple as electing a simple senate majority, you're either wildly misinformed or you're arguing in bad faith.
"Childish" is framing opinion different than your own as lesser rather than engaging, and accusing others of bad faith.
Do i need to make myself more clear, young man? Or would that be uncivil? Sheesh, you're as exhausting as a teenager
Oh I didn't engage? Yes clearly I didn't engage. Sorry for not engaging.
I'm sorry i have never found the proper combination of words to make empty fools discover shame, so i guess we're both sad now.