Fred Hampton was killed because he was a communist, not a "leftist". His FBI file, the statements from the police, and the statements from officials involved all explicitly blame his communist sentiment and work with communist orgs for the police state's...attention...on him. He didn't advocate for a liberal national party. Do not insult him by misrepresenting him or his death.
But okay. That phrase just doesn't separate her from Biden when that's what the tweet is about.
I didn't say anything. I asked for clarification on liberals' general sentiments.
But according to the comment I replied to, she wouldn't be "better", she would be the same. That's my question, which I don't get how that's bad faith. If she's "the most left wing since FDR", but Biden is already that, in what way is that an argument for her? What point is the comment making? You're not explaining anything.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying, "smart guy". So what does it mean to be "the most left wing president since FDR"? If Biden already is that, what does it matter if Warren would be?
Wait, liberals have been saying that Biden is the "most left wing president since FDR" for his entire term. Have you all changed your mind?
Anti-genocide is pro-genocide, pro-genocide is anti-genocide and other Newspeak brought you by the crafty narrative-spinning minds at BlueAnon.
I’m not answering any query.
Oh, that's much more clearly a ChatGPT answer. Thank you for the clarity.
Says the person advocating for the guy supplying the genocide with weapons.
I'm just going to repost this because you are continuing to ignore the people that actually matter here.
Much less easy if you are poor, homeless, an asylum-seeker, immigrant, Palestinian, live in a climate-affected area…
Because there is nothing "great" about any of this. None of this fixes any of the problems, which is great for comfortable people like you.
That is bad.
The person I replied to made it about themselves. If they are allowed to say "I think this is good because it helped me", why am I not allowed to say it's not good because it didn't help me? Are you admitting that Democrats are "me first"?
Also, conveniently leaving off the more important part of the sentence, aren't you?
removing medical debt
He didn't do that. This isn't what it says. You are the one arguing in bad faith. Why lie? He would not do this, because it would harm his corporate backers in the medical industry. He did not remove any medical debt. Hell, he won't even do the much less impressive thing and remove student debt.
I'm sure that's very easy to say when you are comfortable, have health coverage, and are likely white.
Much less easy if you are poor, homeless, an asylum-seeker, immigrant, Palestinian, live in a climate-affected area....
Also, I care much more about those less fortunate than me than I do myself. The person I responded to was the one to make it about themselves. I'm the one talking about those who are being ignored, while you are the one ignoring them. Don't talk to me about "damaging".
Let's not celebrate inaction on matters that mean life or death to people. None of the above have helped me, or anyone less fortunate than me.
You are right on every single one of these, but you aren't going to get a response to any of them on here.
Liberals stop caring about immigrants, women, poor people, COVID, etc, as soon as there is a Democrat in power they can make excuses for.
Banning medical debt from credit reports
Negotiating drug prices
He's only able to do these because he opposes universal healthcare. He wants people to die of lack of access to healthcare (70,000 per year) or lack of insurance (45,000 per year). What do dead people, or people who can't afford to be diagnosed, or people who can't afford necessary procedures care about their credit reports or drugs they can't get prescribed? Why would anyone cheer a horribly policy?
As if the media aren't congratulating him enough on his "tough red line" for Israel's genocide that they somehow never break. Ever the victims, Democrats in power are.
this movement
Neoliberalism is not a "movement", it's the global hegemon. You're pretending to be a part of this small, bespoke, counter-cultural collective that needs to remain principled, and meanwhile obstinately upholding the status quo. And at the same time holding this globe-spanning conspiracy theory that international conglomerates care about your personal feelings.
The data is out there, and you can just freely listen to scientists. But you will not read or listen, because they are saying things that you don't like. Combatting climate change will require a great upheaval. It requires policies that liberal parties in major governments are not putting forward. People in the most vulnerable countries will die. But, again, you are more interested in protecting the status quo, most likely because you are comfortable and those more vulnerable don't matter enough to you.
You are trying to frame this as if the people further to your left, who want to do more to combat climate change than you, are closer to the right. But that's impossible. If it was up the right, all the countries with brown people in them will burn, and the wealthy countries will deny the immigrants. If it's up to the centrists, all the countries with brown people in them will burn 20 years later, and the wealthy countries will deny the immigrants. I would very much not like to punish those most vulnerable in the long term for a feeling of moral superiority in the short term.
I don't know anyone personally who thinks that the stuff he's calling green capitalism will fix the problem.
I know a lot of them, and they all hold very powerful offices in governments all over the world. They're usually portrayed as the "left" of these governments.
No, they want you to keep voting for milquetoast centrist liberal policies that don't hurt their bottom line. Car companies and oil companies love that the "left" party in the US only supports pro-car policies that maintain our reliance on them. Every polluting company absolutely loves the tax credit non-solution because it will cost them much less than an actual emissions-reducing solution. Plastic companies love that there is no widespread plastic ban or mandatory reduction in plastic use by manufacturers, and instead only consumer-aimed recycling programs.
Fossil fuel companies absolutely love your defeatist "don't let perfect be the enemy of good" attitude. They love these policies that make you feel like you are doing something but don't actually change anything. They love when you tell people who want actual solutions that they need to vote for the compromise. They still get to keep their profits going strong, and the Earth will only burn after the people pushing these policies are long dead.
Liberals continue to confirm that the depth of their worldview is a flat, featureless line, with no prompting whatsoever. Thank you.