I’m frustrated with the reflexive "both sides are equally bad" response that shuts down any meaningful analysis of what's actually happening in our politics.

I'm not naive about the Democratic Party's problems. They struggle with internal divisions, sometimes cave to corporate pressure, and they’ve made compromises that disappointed their base. But when I look at voting records, policy proposals, and legislative priorities, I see meaningful differences that have real consequences for people's lives.

On issues I care about (healthcare access, climate action, voting rights, ext.) one party consistently proposes solutions and votes for them when they have the numbers. The other party doesn’t just oppose these policies, they fight tooth and nail to undermine them, delay them, or dismantle them entirely. That’s not a matter of opinion. That’s a matter of public record.

When Democrats fail to deliver, it’s often because they lack sufficient majorities or face procedural roadblocks. When they do have power, they’ve passed significant legislation on infrastructure, climate investment, and healthcare expansion. Meanwhile, when Republicans have unified control, their priorities have been tax cuts for the wealthy and rolling back environmental protections.

I understand the appeal of cynicism. It can feel sophisticated to dismiss all politicians as equally corrupt. But that cynicism serves the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.

If you can't tell the difference between someone trying to reform a broken system and someone actively working to keep it broken, you're not offering insight. You're providing cover for obstruction.

Does this mean Democrats are perfect? Of course not. Should we hold them accountable when they fall short? Absolutely. But pretending there are no meaningful differences between the parties just because neither is perfect makes it harder to build the coalitions we need to create the change we actually want to see.

[–] salacious_coaster@infosec.pub 33 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

I agree with you that the parties are not the same. The GOP are outright evil puppets of the billionaire class. The Democrats are ineffectual cowards who've made careers out of paying lip service to the right thing, and every now and then doing something helpful if it's convenient for them and doesn't piss off their billionaire donors. A lot of the time that ends up translating to the same results for most people.

I don't buy the "sorry, our hands are tied" line we always get from the left. Dems throw up their hands even when they do have majorities. The first meaningful opportunity the Democrats had to obstruct Trump's agenda, after the left base had been screaming for weeks for their representatives to do something, Schumer rolled over immediately. I can't take this party seriously anymore.

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 11 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

I won’t defend Schumer's choice here. It was a bad call, and the anger from House Democrats and the base was completely justified. You're right that the party leadership sometimes folds when they should fight. They make strategic decisions that feel disconnected from the urgency the moment demands. And yes, Democrats have corporate-aligned figures who blunt the force of reform, but that is also a reality of our current system that we have to work within.

But, sticking to your example, there is a key difference: when Democrats cave, it’s often to avoid causing harm, like a shutdown that would devastate working people. When Republicans cave, it’s to secure more tax cuts, more deregulation, and more authoritarian power. The intent and the outcome are not the same, even if the compromise leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth.

It also matters that Democrats have factions pushing from within. The anger from House Dems, from AOC, from the base, that’s real pressure that can move things. Republicans don’t have that kind of internal accountability. Their party punishes dissent and rewards obstruction.

And while it's easy to say “they always have excuses,” the reality is that even when Democrats had a trifecta in 2021, their margin in the Senate was literally 50-50. One or two bad actors (like Manchin or Sinema) could tank an entire agenda, and did. That's not an excuse. That's a math problem, and the only way around it is bigger, more engaged progressive coalitions.

So yes, Schumer failed in that moment (and many others). Yes, we should be furious. But walking away or writing off the party entirely means handing power back to a movement that’s not just flawed. It’s actively hostile to democracy, human rights, and the planet. That’s not moral purity. That’s surrender.

[–] salacious_coaster@infosec.pub 9 points 13 hours ago

Your defense of the Democrats boils down to "at least we're not the GOP." And you're not wrong. I've done my part by voting against the GOP in every election since I was eligible. The Democrats themselves don't even do that. I wish their effort would at least match mine, seeing as it's their full-time job. And I wish you held your reps as accountable as your fellow voters.

[–] schema@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

I agree with you and like to emphasis on one point you already mentioned. The demcrats encompass everything to the left of the GOP. Because the GOP is far right, everything to the left of it includes center right, conservatives, centrist and liberal opinions, as well as a lot, or most of the left wing depending on definitions.

In my opinion this is one of the major reasons why the democrats seem so undecicive, because there already are so many different world views of people that are forced to be in the same party, because effectively, there only are two of them, and the alternative is straight up fascism.

If the democrats ever regain power, changing the voting system to allow for a 3rd or 4th party to actually emerge would be a saving grace, but unfortunately, the above mentioned composition will likely prevent them from it, even when in power. And on top of that they will have their hands full with the debt crisis.

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Democrats CONTINUE to enforce and support the unpopular, treasonous, ineffectual leadership. We can talk about Schumer's bad choice all day long but it means nothing if he is never ever ever ever ever "held accountable" for it. They literally stuck an old fossil with cancer in the DNC chair versus the clearly obvious choice that gets things done and excites the voters. He literally ran a PRO-TRUMP Democrat to unseat McConnell when all the energy was behind Charles Booker.

Young voters and progressives do not believe in anything you say because there is no will to back it up. They get stabbed in the face over and over and over and over and over again.

As for the good policies that Dems enacted? They're easily dismantled or else undermined by administrative excess, handing power back to the GOP. Case in point: FEMA and the Lahaina fire relief. FEMA swooped in to help house the displaced; to do this they paid $9000/month in rent to anyone that would help house the victims. All of our rents went up ASTRONOMICALLY because FEMA far exceeded the market rate, leading to more homelessness even for those NOT displaced by the fire. Landlords got RICH AS FUUUUUCK on the taxpayer dime.

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 1 points 13 hours ago

There's a great article written here about how Neo-liberal policy backed up into this corner where neither party can produce meaningful progress.

[–] Muaddib@sopuli.xyz 0 points 9 hours ago

You've fallen for Democrat propaganda. They want you to think they can't be taken seriously. They want to lose.

[–] shads@lemy.lol 14 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

From my detached non American (but still a citizen of the planet so likely to get fucked hard by the way Americans vote) point of view, seems like Americans are continually letting perfect be the enemy of least bad. "Well since Democrats are kinda bad in these instances maybe we should just go fully fascist theological doom cult. That will force the Democrats to improve, or kill us all."

[–] DrDeadCrash@programming.dev 5 points 7 hours ago

American here....I think it's actually more the opposite. Everyone is being told to vote for the lessor evil and no one is getting what they want. That's what caused all this to begin with imo... The Magas torched their party trying to get something different to happen politically (not to excuse them or anyone). This is all on the 2 party system, if we make it out of this I think ending that system is one major change that will need to take place to avoid repeating the cycle. Basically, we lost our Republic a long time ago when Congress stopped representing us and became owned by billionaires.

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 12 points 13 hours ago

Ive always put it in the very crude fashion of "They are both going to fuck us, but one of them spits on it and goes in gentle the other one wants us to struggle."

[–] Muaddib@sopuli.xyz 3 points 9 hours ago

It's called controlled opposition. The Democratic party has a lot of passionate, honest people, who want to make the world a better place. But they're funded and directed at the highest levels of leadership by a group that secretly wants to make the world a worse place.

And the way they accomplish that is making sure the passionate honest people lose. Kamala Harris was bragging about drilling for oil and staying quiet about Gaza because either she or the people giving her advice wanted her to lose.

"Both sides bad" is the party's intended messaging strategy. And it's a lie. But it's a lie people are falling for and repeating.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

shitty children petulantly whining they never get their way.

mind you, "their way" would alienate more than 60% of voters

no party is perfect, but they are wholly deluded and will lash out like spurned tweens denied their crocks. they know conservatives don't give two flying fucks about them, so they have to lash out at dems / liberals / anyone not sufficiently ML to stand up to their purity tests.

it would be hilarious academically, but their bullshit does real world harm.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today -5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

The more accurate form of the comment to which you're reacting would be:

Can I have a free beer?

Conservatives: No

Liberals: Points to novelty sign on wall Free Beer Tomorrow winks "so you want a beer today? That'll be $8.99"

The results aren't exactly the same, but the gulf is not meaningful is the problem. Realistically, most people don't actually like either party, they just dislike the other party more. If one day we had a 7 random parties just appear and Rs and Ds vanish, for a solid 20 years, political discourse would be verdant and nuanced in a way rarely seen in the US.

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 5 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Ooof that fact that you think the "gulf is not meaningful" is insane.

I mean JFC, are you blind or a troll? I don't even have enough time to list the Nazi level illegal and democracy ending shit Trump is doing right now.

[–] NewSocialWhoDis@lemm.ee 2 points 9 hours ago

Attacking the commenter personally is not helpful. Obviously the whole destruction-of-American-Democracy thing is very different. But let's look at some salient issues.

As far as the war in Gaza, Biden/ establishment Democrats still stood behind Netanyahu in the wake of Oct 7th. There was only slight functional differences in Biden's America's stance on Israel in Gaza and Trump's.

Less salient, adding a cap on mortgage interest deductions on taxes. Republicans under Trump I did it to punish wealthy coastal (high home value) residents who rented to vote blue. Democrats left it in place because they approved of people who have more home value paying more taxes.

It goes on. Both Democrats and Republicans failed to close Guantanamo, advance voting reform, advance marijuana legalization, end the war in Afghanistan, or take ANY action about climate change for decades, etc.

It's not every issue mind you, but Democrats are frustratingly adherent to the status quo while the United States has needed meaningful reform for decades.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Lol, I have two degrees in studying this, and I'm old enough to have seen the full cycle play out a few times for both sides. I'm not trolling, I'm jaded AF. And I'm taking about what either party does as a party line. Orange Bully is obviously different, but it's an individual thing, nothing the party itself has accomplished or done.

Look, if the difference was so vast, ask yourself why Schumer and all the other 70+ year old Dems seem hellbent on laying low and doing nothing but maintain their own power? Maybe get a couple seats in 2026? That's not resistance. That's capitulation. Not even strategic capitulation, simply consent and wishes for crumbs. The same thing the alt-right does because TACO boy always chickens out when it comes to a "crossing the Rubicon" style move.

Political parties only exist to enrich and entrench politicians in the party. They are unions for politicians, with no benefits passed to the voters unless it first benefits the politicians. Open your eyes. If you think either party is so noble and steadfast and true, ask yourself where, in a time of need, they are.

Edit: I'm a privacy advocate, and so you have shit like this: https://lemmy.today/post/31901334. While on the other side, journalist Taylor Lorenz has repeatedly mentioned that during a social media influencer event the Biden White House held, they pushed for the idea of "unmasking internet trolls," which by default means knowing who everyone is online. (The most recent episode of Power User mentions it again) This, the slow deterioration from a few Senators in 2017-18 trying for an internet bill of rights, down to not a bill but...principles, down to privacy as a consumer right, down to F it we need tech bro money too so scrap it all and let's support Digital IDs now (https://www.meritalk.com/articles/congress-warms-to-digital-ids-as-fraud-privacy-concerns-grow/)

Plenty of examples of both parties having incredibly similar implementations of two different sounding policy goals. Which is fascinating to read about, but a terrifying place in which to live.