You're viewing part of a thread.
Everybody wants change yesterday, but they never actually get that. They don't even get major immediate change. At best they get incremental progress.
So when evaluating someone's achievements, you can't hold them to an impossible standard. Someone is not a failure if they were unable to change the past. In fact, they are a success if they deliver the best outcome that is actually achievable. And history shows that outcome is incremental progress.
I think you're misattributing who the villains of progress are. MLK had attributed it to the white moderates that stood in the way of progress. I'm doing the same. The right is not a majority. If the moderates would play ball with the progressives, we could get a lot done immediately, but they refuse.
In order for moderates to play ball with progressives, progressives must be willing to play ball with moderates.
We do... all the time. We put Biden over the finish line, for example. And then yall ask us to do it again while refusing to throw us some bones.
We are happy to compromise, but its supposed to be a give and take. Moderates never give
Leftist support of Biden is why we got mandatory union recognition, student debt relief, and corporate tax increases, all of which were championed by Bernie Sanders but previously had little support from moderates.
I think your definition of leftist is skewed by US media. Nothing listed here is even remotely left leaning. Again, I believe in the dissolution of capitalism. These are all capitalist policies. Unions are only nessessary to combat capitalism on thier own terms, student debt wouldnt exist without capitalism, and taxes wouldnt matter either.
Yall are too narrow minded and are stuck in an industrial era mindset. Remember, US Democrats are right leaning in the rest of the devloped world.
I am comparing Biden's presidency to those of Obama and Clinton. All of those actions taken by Biden represent a significant shift to the left compared to his Democratic predecessors.
Right, and both of those president were arguably less progressive than Nixon. What with the EPA and incredibly high tax rates. Forget about FDR
The historical context is that the Democratic Party moved incredibly far right to combat Reagan era policies and get wins from those kinds of voters.
To put it simply, I think your brain is rotted by US media. I think you lack all of the historical context that's required to have an honest opinion.
If you think Nixon was more progressive than Obama, then you really don't understand American politics.
Nixon did for the environment what Bush did for Homeland Security. He took a bunch of agencies that already existed and were already issuing regulations, and put them all under control of one person who took orders directly from the President. Thus making it much easier for future Republicans, like Trump, to interfere with environmental rule-making.
And Nixon didn't raise tax rates. He signed a tax bill sent by an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress. It didn't raise tax rates either, but it instituted the Alternative Minimum Tax which everyone ignored until decades later when they realized it had unintended effects on the middle class.
So you just sweep Nixon's accomplishments under the rug because they dont help your point, got it. EZ block. You arent worth either of our breaths.
There are plenty of reasons to not like Richard Nixon, but some of this policy is not the reason.
Nixon's first choice for EPA administrator was William Ruckelshaus.
Years later, William Ruckelshaus was again appointed as EPA administrator. By Ronald Reagan.
So if Nixon is "progressive" because of his EPA, then so is Reagan. They put the same guy in charge.