You must log in or # to comment.
Missed a few.
Johnson: use war to win re-election
Nixon: fight hippies and commies
Ford: pardon Nixon
Carter: attain energy independence
fixed that for you
Now that’s an infographic
“tHeY’rE tEh SaMe!!!”
in terms of their motives? absolutely. is -1 a better score than -5? yes. are they both in the negative? you better believe it. don’t go slobbering all over clinton and obama’s loafers just because there are worse people out there. they tried to enrich the wealthy and succeeded. only difference between the dems and the republicans up until the trump era was that the dems lied about being progressive to distract from their wealth transfer and the repubs committed a casual ongoing genocide to distract from theirs. but it worked- you are distracted. from clinton deregulating corporate oversight and obama kneecapping socialized health care on behalf of the insurance industry. were bush and reagan and bush junior more harmful? yeah of course, but let’s not lionize their coworkers because they used a different disingenuous strategy to launder money for their corporate masters. in the present moment, of course, it’s a bit different- the republicans are stoking the engine of an outright fascist coup and the dems are spoiling the only chance we have to stop it with weak appeals to “decorum” and “practicality”.
so no, they’re not exactly the same. one is jabba the hutt, and the other is the little shitgoblin cackling on his tail. neither will help you. get used to it.
edit: math
Rich people are richer than ever though, so at least the red party delivered.
I would point out that, objectively, Clinton did achieve a budget surplus, and Kennedy’s program eventually got us to the moon (though he, obviously, didn’t live to see it). Say what you will about the ACA. No matter what standard you take, that’s at least a 2/3rds success rate for the blue party by your measure.
ACA was a huge success in the millions of additional people with healthcare. This saved lives. Lots of lives.
The possibility of Universal Healthcare was dropped: this was not a goal of ACA. Most of us expected a follow up to ACA that would do that, but too many people voted for politicians fighting against it. Despite ACA being overwhelmingly popular, it hurt Dems in elections and they really haven’t had an opportunity to do much since
Which let’s be real - the only reason there was opposition to the ACA was because Obama did it. It was basically RomneyCare. Most people (on the right) opposed to the ACA didn’t actually know why they didn’t like it - it was done by that uppity guy who wore a mustard suit.
My little brother has a genetic disorder - already had multiple, intensive surgeries by his tenth birthday. He would have capped out his lifetime insurance payouts around the time the ACA passed. He would probably not be able to get any form of insurance now because of his preexisting conditions, if not for the ACA.
The ACA’s problem was that it did not have a public option. We aren’t operating under a free market - insurance companies are colluding with each other and hospitals. There is no actual competition. Even if universal healthcare wasn’t a moral imperative (how the fuck do you keep up your insurance when you’re sick? when the company you work for fires you because you miss too much work?), it’s also not even being run by the rules of the “free market.”
If I remember correctly a survey of people was done asking how they felt about “the ACA” and how they felt about “Obamacare.” They approved of the ACA and HATED Obamacare…
Fucking propaganda man…
The ACA’s problem was that it did not have a public option.
That’s still rationing healthcare by wealth. The problem with the ACA is that it was written by liberals and relies on capitalism. The best healthcare systems use central planning and are free or near free.
I mean, agreed, but at least having the public option would drive down some prices. Our health care system is a failure even by the standards of liberal capitalism.
Rolled my ankle a few weeks ago - probably fractured it, hobbled around and now I can walk on it without hurting. No medical care - I’m saving up $300 for my blood work for my routine check up and figured that even the Urgent Care would do nothing and charge me $100 for it.
The ACA gave me affordable healthcare when I was young and poor and had none.
Republicans have never even come close to doing something like that for me. Quite the opposite actually.
Oh, I agree with you. However, I wasn’t going to assume that the person to whom I was replying would agree.
I would point out that, objectively, Clinton did achieve a budget surplus,
That’s not even a worthwhile goal. The state can print money for whatever it wants. Clinton didn’t change any of that. The state still wastes endless resources on the MIC, imperialism, etc. while many people lack basic human needs: food, shelter, healthcare, livable environment, etc.
Zero is a meaningless goal that changed absolutely nothing, especially long term.
Oops, all Heritage Foundation.
The two party system is cooked.
Nothing will get better till the two party system is a thing of the past.
Gotta switch to proportional representation if you want to break up the two parties. I suggest Sequential Proportional Approval Voting for multi-winner elections, and pair it with regular Approval Voting for single-winner elections. Both can be implemented at every level in the US, and some places can do so by referendum. Lemme know if you’re interested.
Weird cuz a lot of things Clinton did seem to be more money for rich people too
That was always their secondary goal.
Reducing the deficit by cutting things that benefit the working class coincides with money for rich people.
Yeah let me ignore all the atrocities that blue presidents committed abroad, those don’t count since its brown people
I happen to be a fan of voting for what’s best for the country I live in and the people I care about, then taking other countries into consideration after that.
Life isn’t perfect. I strive for whatever is closest. And I’m smart enough to know voting 3rd party in a presidential election is dumb as fuck because no 3rd party is viable because none have done the work to become viable.
So I’ll take the party that has a record of voting in favor of middle/lower class Americans over the party that only punishes average Americans and takes their rights away.
Pretty basic math.
And the Americans are dumb enough to fall for the red lies every time they run.
Nixon’s Southern Strategy
Winning elections for Republicans since 1968
Maybe nobody actually gives a shit about “balanced budgets”, imperialism in outer space, or sabotaged healthcare.
But but Donny gonna send us $5k by Febru-sprin-summer!
Everyone will get their $5k in two weeks.
Theodore Roosevelt: Be a badass mother fucker
This is not true. Trump’s goal as president is to stay out of prison.
That was goal 1, now goal 2 is excuting the biggest grifting world tour ever seen.
I’d’ve rather that it’d never come but, at a certain point, it reaches a point where it is mesmerizing, in its scope and scale.
That was his goal as a candidate. His goal now is to put everyone else in
prisonconcentration camps.Well there’s two rows missing. That would be Trump 2: get trumped
Imagine how much he would snitch. He’ll never be allowed to cop a deal or go to prison.
It’s not about the party or the POTUS, it’s all about the oligarchs who are funding the parties and really make things happen. All of them were in debt to oligarchs and had to return the given money for the campaigns somehow. Don’t be fooled, as long as the funding of political parties isn’t reformed to prevent these oligarchs to grab everything there will not be much for the rest of us. Just enough to avoid revolt and riots as long as sustainable. Democracy in the USA is a mascarade.
they all got more money for rich people. did any of them impose term limits, stop insider training, or impose any meaningful penalties for those that already have a lot of wealth? they got wealthier and so did all around.
They literally didn’t, though. Clinton obtained surplus by raising taxes and by removing several caps which benefitted the wealthy.
And cutting the social safety net.
Nope, they all deregulated, supported monopolies & tax loopholes.
… all while the core infrastructure (healthcare, transit systems, tax systems, education, housing, etc) withered away by design.
Not to mention the massive bail-outs via blank no-strings attached checks (if a gov has to give monies to a private company that usually means shareholders lose their value, but not in the USA, they just get free monies).
And ofc war profiteering (& constantly killing some of the poorest civilians on the planet).
What about Sanders? How about Warren?
We need congressional primary attendance to break 15% before we get to complain about term limits. If you don’t show up when you have a say, then you are responsible for the career politicians.
We should be voting twice every two years, not once every four, for federal elections alone.
I hope you’re aware that Sanders was never president. But also that he’s not a democra, which folks sometimes forget.
They’re asking about enacting term limits. There is a presidential term limit, so I assumed they were talking about Congress.
neither were president or are in this picture? so what about them?
You asked about creating term limits. There are limits on presidential terms, so I assumed you meant congressional term limits. No? Am I missing your point?
the OP posted Pic about presidents. my comment was did any of those presidents introduce term limits on congress or SCOTUS, etc.
I’d have loved Warren or Sanders, but neither were president.
Term limits would require legislation written by Congress. They cannot be implemented by POTUS.
I’m sure an executive order or thirty would have sufficed in leau of proper legislation.
see: current administration
Executive orders can just be repealed by the next administration. The most it could possibly affect is one House term.
Dems: More money for millionaires. Reps: More money for billionaires.
Arguably, all were successful except Obama.
It was too partisan I think. The ideals of universal Healthcare were not fully realized but definitely did expand Healthcare access, which isn’t enough.
There were a couple corporate dems that ratfucked progress
The dems could have kicked them off all committees, the president appoints the head of the IRS and the Attorney General, either of whom can fuck a politician up, or just removed the filibuster. Pelosi chose to let Liberman be the villain of the week. Same shit we saw under Biden where every week 1 dem or another or the parliamentarian or norms would stop the democrats from doing anything that might improve people’s conditions (and get the dems reelected).
“Successful”
