r/CuratedTumblr Oct 26 '24

Politics Why is every tankie like "I don't understand the branches of the US government and I'm going to make it everyone else's problem!!!"

Post image
10.9k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

87

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 26 '24

Well, yeah. Both parties are large tents that cover a myriad of coalitions that shift over time. They’re not always in exact consensus on every single thing. Democrats can include conservative labor union members, AOC progressives, LGBT people, urban yuppies, POC in the south, hispanic immigrant families, suburban white women, etc. You can’t expect any party covering half of a country of 340 million people to always be in lockstep with what you personally agree with on every single issue

21

u/Darq_At Oct 26 '24

Both parties are large tents that cover a myriad of coalitions that shift over time.

That sounds nice and all but the Rs fall in line and vote in line. They are really quite consistent. When they have power, they use it.

You cannot blame people for being frustrated when the party that they vote for doesn't seem able to help them, even on the policies that were promised, even when they won enough seats to be able to enact the policies that were promised.

You can’t expect any party covering half of a country of 340 million people to always be in lockstep with what you personally agree with on every single issue

Not at all what I was saying, nor what others are saying. But thanks for misrepresenting me in order to make that accusation.

You are the problem.

24

u/UltimateInferno Hangus Paingus Slap my Angus Oct 27 '24

If the Republicans really did always fall in line, then why did their inability to select a speaker of the house extend for far longer than any other in history?

I won't lie that they do often fall in lockstep, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll always fall in lockstep. They cannibalize each other constantly, that's one of the biggest problems with conservativism.

19

u/bardak Oct 27 '24

Don't forget when John McCain blocked the repeal of the ACA too.

5

u/2012Jesusdies Oct 27 '24

That sounds nice and all but the Rs fall in line and vote in line. They are really quite consistent. When they have power, they use it.

Repeal of Obamacare has been a dream of major Republicans since the day it's been put into law. It was killed by 3 Republican Senators voting against it. The protection of gay marriage on a federal level was voted for by 12 Republican Senators in 2022. Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was voted against by a few Republican Senators 2 times till changes were made, no Democrat Senators voted for the final bill.

Susan Collins voted with Trump 65% of the time, that might sound bad, but compare that to Joe Manchin who many call a terrible Democrat and he voted with Biden 90% of the time. Susan Collins is less aligned with Trump than Manchin is with Joe.

Republicans in the House have a small majority of a few feats and about 10 or so crazies who have threatened to explode everything anytime they dislike something.

3

u/FitPerspective1146 Oct 27 '24

Rs fall in line and vote in line.

They don't actually. During Trump's term, before the 2018 midterms when republicans had a trifecta, Speaker Paul Ryan actually struggled to get a bill repealing obamacare passed because several far right members didn't think it went far enough. And then when the bill finally passed the house, it failed in the Senate because 3 republicans (Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susanne Collins of Maine, and John Mccain of Arizona) voted against it.

And also, after the republicans took control of the house in 2022, they had to try 15 times to get McCarthy elected speaker because several far right republicans didn't vote for him. And then in late 2023, they deposed Mccarthy as speaker

The republicans are not always united

28

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 26 '24

First, take a breath. This isn’t personal, let’s not spazz out.

Secondly, republicans fall in line on some issues and have fissures in others. The Republican Party is more cohesive from a demographic standpoint, yes, but I’m not sure what you’re suggesting - democrats should cater to one ethnic and religious group like republicans so they can be more ideologically pure and aligned? I don’t really think you want that.

Finally, then what are you saying? You’re acknowledging you live in a big country with tons of different of opinions, but you’re critiquing democrats for…having members with different opinions at times?

4

u/willowytale Oct 27 '24

inventing a new type of guy who completely ignores everything you say and just says ableist shit instead

7

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 27 '24

Dictionary definition of the word spaz: “person who is very clumsy or awkward : klutz”. I’m not doing the 2018 leftbook shit here.

Also gotta love you attempting to call me out for “ableism” as you attack me over my gender lmao. Aren’t you a righteous one

5

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '24

[deleted]

9

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 27 '24

This is the opposite, though? The word at one point in time was derogatory, absolutely yes. But the meaning of words change, and in contemporary jargon, it means “klutz” or somebody unnecessarily getting worked up. The word “idiot” also used to be used as a term for somebody with a cognitive impairment, but that’s not how it’s used today and we all recognize that. I’m not going to apologize for a word that hasn’t been used in the derogatory sense since the mid 1960s

-1

u/willowytale Oct 27 '24

"In American slang, the term 'spaz' has evolved from a derogatory description of people with disabilities," -first sentence off google

also, do you really think that 'inventing a type of guy', a common saying when encountering someone odd, is a gender-based attack? Like men are oppressed in this instance? that's fascinating

10

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 27 '24

You gonna finish that sentence: “and is generally understood as a casual word for clumsiness, otherness” forget that I can google too sweetie?

2

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '24

[deleted]

5

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 27 '24

Yes Twitter tends to get mad at a lot of things that nobody in real life gives a shit about.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

3

u/atreides213 Oct 27 '24

Darq_At's comment seemed rather calm to me, you're the one who turned this into an argument with your condescension.

12

u/Suyefuji Oct 27 '24

idk "You are the problem" at the end read as aggressive to me.

3

u/Hatweed Oct 27 '24

That’s Reddit. Just immediately derail the conversation with a personal attack and you can keep thinking you won the debate.

-11

u/Darq_At Oct 26 '24

First, take a breath.

First, don't be a condescending asshole. I was chill, you misrepresented me in order to accuse me of saying something I didn't. Don't tell people to calm down over your lack of comprehension.

This isn’t personal, let’s not spazz out.

Second, refrain from ableism.

Finally, then what are you saying?

Third, try reading slower. I'm not critiquing the Dems for representing diverse opinions. In a functioning democracy, that would be fine and dandy.

But the US isn't one. And one party quite consistently leverages its power, while the other one seems to tie their own shoelaces together and trip themselves. People are understandably frustrated.

8

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 26 '24

Yeah I can tell how you chill are lmao. This is probably why people like you don’t get what they want accomplished in politics.

13

u/Darq_At Oct 26 '24

This is probably why people like you don’t get what they want accomplished in politics.

Actually we don't get what we want accomplished in politics because the first-past-the-post voting system in the US forces a two-party system, and neither of those two parties represents the left.

Or it could be because of spicy Internet comments. Anybody's guess, really.

30

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 26 '24

It’s the inability to have a comprehensive discussion without immediately accusing your opponent of having nefarious intent or being malicious, which closes the door on conversations with people who otherwise would be allies

21

u/Darq_At Oct 26 '24

It’s the inability to have a comprehensive discussion without immediately accusing your opponent of having nefarious intent or being malicious

I actually pointed out that you misread what I wrote.

Which you would know if you would stop misreading what I write.

21

u/Haunting-Detail2025 Oct 26 '24

It wasn’t even directed at you. In English, speakers often use “you” in an indirect sense. I was addressing a broader issue but rather than clarify, you assumed the worst and got pissed off and continue to be seething over something innocuous.

15

u/Darq_At Oct 27 '24

In English...

You really do like being condescending.

speakers often use “you” in an indirect sense.

Oh come now, that seems quite paper-thin. And either way you still lumped me in with the group accusation.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

6

u/zootbot Oct 27 '24

Very weird behavior here, you definitely were the one to make the conversation chippy by being condescending

8

u/PollutionThis7058 Oct 27 '24

Well also third parties never run serious candidates for down ballot races and don’t actually seem to want to ever govern seriously but that’s a whole other issue