What did Democrats do wrong?

[thaiboxerken]

i think there's a point where slowly compromising america away one piece at a time becomes untenable.

To be fair, it isn't compromise to just give The Regime everything they want but get nothing in return.

 

[Emily's Cat]

What was missed was a chance to force Republicans to capitulate.
By caving in, Democrats give credence to the narrative that it was Democrats who kept the shutdown going.
This will emboldened Trump &co to do the same thing next time, as is always the case when you give in to a bully

I mean... it WAS the democrats who kept the shutdown going.

Last year, republicans filibustered because they didn't like the CR, and the dems said the shutdown was the republican's fault for not adopting what the dems proposed.
This year, democrats filibustered because they didn't like the CR, and the dems said the shutdown was the republican's fault for not adopting what the dems proposed.

 

[wareyin]

I mean... it WAS the democrats who kept the shutdown going.

Last year, republicans filibustered because they didn't like the CR, and the dems said the shutdown was the republican's fault for not adopting what the dems proposed.
This year, democrats filibustered because they didn't like the CR, and the dems said the shutdown was the republican's fault for not adopting what the dems proposed.

I love how "centrists" somehow absolutely can not fault the party who has the majority for actions that the majority party can easily prevent from happening. Somehow self-proclaimed centrists will blame the Democrats no matter what. It's kinda sad how obvious this game is, but here we are.

 

[Random]

I love how "centrists" somehow absolutely can not fault the party who has the majority for actions that the majority party can easily prevent from happening. Somehow self-proclaimed centrists will blame the Democrats no matter what. It's kinda sad how obvious this game is, but here we are.

The phrase you are looking for is "Murc's Law". Basically, only Democrats are responsible for their actions, while Republicans vote the way they do out of reflex or something.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I guess the question is... would the republicans EVER capitulate.

This is one of the big differences between republicans and democrats. On average, I suspect the democrats care when happens to voters. Thus, when people start to suffer (such as people losing SNAP benefits, or people getting fired), they actually have concerns.

On the other hand, republicans do not care. Their only concerns are power and what they can grift. And since 1) Trump doesn't have to worry about re-election, and 2) the party is subservient to Trump, they will happily watch people starve to death if they think it is the best way to cling to power.

The crash has to be bad - extremely bad, extremely painful. There is no other way to cure some Ever Trumpers of their delusion if they are not about to lose their house and car.
Polls were clear that most people blame Republicans more than Dems for the shutdown.
Instead of rescuing Trump, Dems should have waited until no more planes can fly.

I think it just boils down to many Democrats wanting to make sure they will get to fly home for their holidays - electoral considerations didn't really enter into it.
Thing is, Republicans want to fly, too. They would have caved

Maybe you dems should sort out your story, because these can't both be true at the same time. Either Dems care about voters and don't want people to suffer... or Dems are perfectly willing to make everyone suffer in order to get their way.

I'll add the disclaimer here: Neither Dems nor Reps actually seem to care about the citizens they're supposed to serve. Both parties are more invested in gaining and retaining power for themselves than in actually serving the interests of the country and citizenry.

 

[Random]

Maybe you dems should sort out your story, because these can't both be true at the same time. Either Dems care about voters and don't want people to suffer... or Dems are perfectly willing to make everyone suffer in order to get their way.

I'll add the disclaimer here: Neither Dems nor Reps actually seem to care about the citizens they're supposed to serve. Both parties are more invested in gaining and retaining power for themselves than in actually serving the interests of the country and citizenry.

Of course they can be true at the same time. You can care about voters and still be forced into a situation where you have to cause them short-term harm to prevent them from suffering long-term harm.

It's like the whole "Do not negotiate with terrorists" thing. Paying a ransom to get your loved ones back is more likely to get your loved ones back, but it also makes it more likely that people will engage in terrorism overall.

 

[Emily's Cat]

With all the blame that's currently flying around, I've not seen any directed at those who are actually responsible for the current mess: the millions of US citizens who voted to give Trump and his clownshow full control of their country.

Maybe, instead of trying to mitigate the effects of their insane act of massive self harm, the outvoted Dems should just sit back and let them suffer the consequences. It might be the only way to teach them not to do something so incredibly stupid ever again.

This might sound like a good idea on paper... but it's not republicans suffering, you know that right? It's american citizens being used as pawns by both parties who are suffering. It's people not getting paid, not being able to eat - those are the people who are suffering, and they're suffering REGARDLESS of which party they voted for. There are just as many blue-state liberals bearing the burden of this game as there are red-state conservatives. The politicians aren't suffering at all - they still get ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ paid, they still get all their free health care benefits, they still get stipends for housing and all the other extra privileges. Sure, there might be a few who have friends or family affected by flight cancellations, but sure as ◊◊◊◊ almost NONE of our congresscritters fly commercial. And even those few who DO manage to fly commercial (first class, of course, and on the taxpayer's dime at that), I would bet none of the flights THEY had booked were considered for cancellations.

JFC, I'm so tired of politicians abusing the people they're supposed to serve so that they can line their own pockets and ensure their own prosperity. And I'm fed up with the clueless supporters of BOTH parties who willingly stand by and condone such negligent, reckless, and harmful behavior. Every single one of these ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ should lose their jobs.

 

[Emily's Cat]

If right-wing voters did not vote for republicans, we would never have seen the "big beautiful bill" enacted into law, and you wouldn't be looking at the destruction of US Healthcare. The gang of 8 is only relevant because republicans in congress and the white house have messed up the country so much.

Totally! If only we could make this a one-party state that doesn't allow dissent or different perspectives of any sort, if only we could force everyone to adopt the same beliefs and ideologies, then it would be perfect! Nothing could ever go wrong with that, right? Right?!?!?!

 

[Emily's Cat]

They're good men who do nothing.

Every one of them is a bad person who does nothing because they think it benefits them and their clique to create suffering for other people.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Democrats wanted the shutdown to continue (despite harm to some people) because they felt that eliminating health care subsidies would harm millions of people, and that they could somehow force the republicans to reverse their stance on health care. In other words, some short term pain for a few people in order to prevent greater harm to more people from losing health care.

How about we be truthful and accurate here?

The health care subsidies were never being eliminated. That was NEVER on the table this year. What is happening is that an extremely generous, unfunded INCREASE in subsidies was being allowed to expire back to THE ORIGINAL LEVEL in exactly the way that DEMOCRATS designed them to.

The increases in the subsidies was enormous, it went from subsidies covering on average ~70% of the aggregate premium cost to ~86% of the aggregate premium cost. Which might not sound like a huge increase, but it was on top of the underlying costs increasing too. The enhanced subsidies were ALWAYS a temporary measure - they were put in place to address the public health emergency of Covid, and they were DESIGNED BY DEMOCRATS to expire after two years. They got extended another two years because we were still dealing with fallout from the executive orders and emergency actions put in place by Democrats during Covid. Things like... allowing anyone who lost employment for any amount of time to be automatically qualified for Medicaid without the normal means-testing that goes with it, and simultaneously not letting Medicaid disenroll those people when they got new jobs - even if those jobs offered health care. Things like completely removing all of the safeguards around enrollment for ACA that combated both fraud and extreme selection - they made it possible for a person to get diagnosed with cancer and then go sign up for ACA coverage immediately afterward.

The only thing Republicans are doing... is letting the Democrat-designed enhanced subsidies do exactly what Dems designed them to do: expire when the public health emergency is over and revert back to the subsidy methods in place prior to covid.

So the Dems have been holding the entire country hostage because the Reps aren't interfering with the thing that Dems put in place.

That's what's actually happening.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now, speaking from an insider's perspective... NEITHER of the parties is in a good spot on this. The original ACA subsidies had some serious flaws. There were some very ill-conceived gaps in how the subsides work that created perverse incentives, and which ended up inadvertently punishing people for the horrible crime of being over 50 and making $60K a year. It's been stupid since ACA was originally passed - and don't forget that the vast majority of ACA was designed by Democrats, including the original subsidy methodology.

The enhanced subsidies were also dumb. They created a gigantic loophole that has allowed a significant amount of fraud to occur, enriching insurance brokers and some soulless providers willing to create false claims for people who had no idea they had even been signed up for ACA coverage in the first place.

What we need is for both parties to pull their heads out of their collective gigantic ass and come up with something that actually makes sense. And while the media is busy selling each side's propaganda to the people... there's actually some reasonably good discussion happening with both dems and reps on this. Things like... increasing the amount of subsidy available to the lowest income brackets relative to original ACA brakets, but having a minimum policyholder responsibility of $5. That prevents fraud because nobody can be signed up without their knowledge - when they get a bill for $5 they're going to take action if they didn't sign up for it themselves, and $5 is low enough that anyone above Medicaid level should be able to afford it. There's also been discussion of sloping the subsidies at higher incomes instead of reverting to the "cliff" that exists in original ACA - this would address the problem with older people seeing an absurd spike in their premiums as soon as they barely top that 400% FPL line. Those are good ideas, and they're things that are being floated across the aisle - and have been for nearly a month. But the media isn't going to tell you that - nor are your politicians. Each side is too busy using US citizens as hammers with which to smash the "other side".

I'm just completely fed up with all of it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

But it's just as easy to say the true author of the suffering, and of the political agenda so called was the Republican party with its insistence on hinging the entire budget of the country, including the jobs of thousands and the welfare of millions, on deleting health benefits, all or nothing.

This is misinformation.

No health benefits are being deleted. The Democrats under Biden put in ENHANCED subsidies for ACA that are being allowed to expire in exactly the way the Dems designed them to do.

 

[Random]

This is misinformation.

No health benefits are being deleted. The Democrats under Biden put in ENHANCED subsidies for ACA that are being allowed to expire in exactly the way the Dems designed them to do.

Argue about how we got here all you want, but 20 million plus US citizens are going to see huge price increases on their health insurance in a little over a month, and the Republicans seem to have no problem doing nothing.

Well, not nothing. They are complaining about illegal immigrants, but that's not really helpful.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I love how "centrists" somehow absolutely can not fault the party who has the majority for actions that the majority party can easily prevent from happening. Somehow self-proclaimed centrists will blame the Democrats no matter what. It's kinda sad how obvious this game is, but here we are.

You just have to know the rules. If Republicans control all of the government, but can't overcome a filibuster, then it is the Democrats fault. If Democrats control all of the government, and can't overcome a filibuster, it is the Democrats fault.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I love how "centrists" somehow absolutely can not fault the party who has the majority for actions that the majority party can easily prevent from happening. Somehow self-proclaimed centrists will blame the Democrats no matter what. It's kinda sad how obvious this game is, but here we are.

This is silly. I'm not blaming the dems no matter what, I'm blaming dems when dems are the ones filibustering to keep the government closed unless reps swoop in and fix the problem that dems created. I blame reps for several of the prior shut downs because they were the ones filibustering and refusing to do their jobs.

 

[Donal]

So, you're position is "money better than people".

 

[Donal]

Oh, look, we're debating with ChatGPT.

How about we be truthful and accurate here?

The health care subsidies were never being eliminated. That was NEVER on the table this year. What is happening is that an extremely generous necessary, unfunded INCREASE in subsidies was being allowed to expire back to THE ORIGINAL LEVEL in exactly the way that DEMOCRATS designed them to compromised with Republicans and centrists to pass.

ftfy

The increases in the subsidies was enormous, it went from subsidies covering on average ~70% of the aggregate premium cost to ~86% of the aggregate premium cost. Which might not sound like a huge increase, but it was on top of the underlying costs increasing too. The enhanced subsidies were ALWAYS a temporary measure - they were put in place to address the public health emergency of Covid, and they were DESIGNED BY DEMOCRATS to expire after two years.

again, as a way to get them passed

They got extended another two years because we were still dealing with fallout from the executive orders and emergency actions put in place by Democrats during Covid.

Nice right-wing framing. Has it occurred to you the response from the botched response and the forcing people back into work too quickly may have caused far more damage than we originally anticipated? I know we basically memory holed CVID, but we should remember a few things.

Things like... allowing anyone who lost employment for any amount of time to be automatically qualified for Medicaid without the normal means-testing that goes with it, and simultaneously not letting Medicaid disenroll those people when they got new jobs - even if those jobs offered health care.

because not everywhere offers adequate health care

Things like completely removing all of the safeguards around enrollment for ACA that combated both fraud and extreme selection - they made it possible for a person to get diagnosed with cancer and then go sign up for ACA coverage immediately afterward.

or maybe, we have a system that just covers everyone

The only thing Republicans are doing... is letting

people suffer

the Democrat-designed enhanced subsidies do exactly what Dems designed them to do: expire when the public health emergency is over and revert back to the subsidy methods in place prior to covid.

Right, Dems should have rammed through a proper bill instead of appealing to the death cult capitalists.

So the Dems have been holding the entire country hostage because the Reps aren't interfering with the thing that Dems put in place.

That's what's actually happening.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now, speaking from an insider's perspective... NEITHER of the parties is in a good spot on this.

Because of bipartisanship.

The original ACA subsidies had some serious flaws.

Ya, thy weren't enough

There were some very ill-conceived gaps in how the subsides work that created perverse incentives, and which ended up inadvertently punishing people for the horrible crime of being over 50 and making $60K a year. It's been stupid since ACA was originally passed - and don't forget that the vast majority of ACA was designed by Democrats, including the original subsidy methodology.

Yes, and heavily negotiated to get centrists on board and futile efforts to appease Republicans. Again, the issue wasn't Democrat being "too far left", it was assuming Republicans were dealing in good faith and that centrists are anything other than Republicans who lack the spin to admit it.

The enhanced subsidies were also dumb.

Because they weren't enough

They created a gigantic loophole that has allowed a significant amount of fraud to occur,

How much? A number, please

enriching insurance brokers and some soulless providers willing to create false claims for people who had no idea they had even been signed up for ACA coverage in the first place.

Hmm, perhaps the agencies tasked with investigating this sort of thing should be funded

What we need is for both parties to pull their heads out of their collective gigantic ass and come up with something that actually makes sense.

Medicare for All

And while the media is busy selling each side's propaganda to the people...

as long as both sides appease the corporate overlords

there's actually some reasonably good discussion happening with both dems and reps on this. Things like... increasing the amount of subsidy available to the lowest income brackets relative to original ACA brakets, but having a minimum policyholder responsibility of $5. That prevents fraud because nobody can be signed up without their knowledge - when they get a bill for $5 they're going to take action if they didn't sign up for it themselves,

No. that is specifically why scammers who get access to folks' bank accounts start with small charges. to see if anyone is paying attention or willing to take action. There's a reason you can't make things like recurring credit card charges "opt out". People simply don't work like that.

and $5 is low enough that anyone above Medicaid level should be able to afford it.

Charging people on Medicaid an arbitrary amount just in case someone else might be committing fraud is cruel.

There's also been discussion of sloping the subsidies at higher incomes instead of reverting to the "cliff" that exists in original ACA - this would address the problem with older people seeing an absurd spike in their premiums as soon as they barely top that 400% FPL line. Those are good ideas, and they're things that are being floated across the aisle - and have been for nearly a month. But the media isn't going to tell you that - nor are your politicians. Each side is too busy using US citizens as hammers with which to smash the "other side".

I'm just completely fed up with all of it.

Republicans in states like Florida and North Carolina specifically sued to prevent the feds from doing things like that.

 

[Emily's Cat]

So, you're position is "money better than people".

When did you stop beating your wife?

 

[Beelzebuddy]

What I am not getting here is why, in a choice between a party that is "going to kill those people" because "it's literally on their agenda" and the other party who doesn't have an agenda of killing people, the people you are talking about go 'meh, I can't be bothered to stop the folks who will be killing people. Screw it, Dems didn't do enough for me so let the Reps kill people.'
That's so short sighted and self centered that they might as well be on team "agenda to kill people"

I'm going to take you on your word for the highlighted. The answer is because voting against doesn't work. If it did we'd have had President Gore in 2000 and recent history would have been very different. But despite two decades of the GOP leaning increasingly fascist and the Dems finding ever more watery sacks of custard to quiver in impotent disdain, it's never enough to consistently win. Turns out votes against Dems + votes for Nazis > votes against Nazis. Sucks, and reflects badly on the American people, but there it is. If you want to win it's not enough to get votes against, you also have to have someone worth voting for. Chuck Schumer's glasses slipping further down his nose ain't it.

For a practical example, consider your most recent local election. Imagine if the D candidate had been caught in some terrible scandal. Embezzling, Epstein list, etc. How bad does it need to be before you're no longer willing to vote for them? Who do you vote for then? Do you vote for the R instead? Or do you leave that box blank, or perhaps find something better to do with your Tuesday? Then just expand that nationally, and realize it takes less than you'd like for the average voter to be dissuaded entirely. Screaming 'VOTE' at them doesn't help, especially if the only good thing anyone can say about their candidate is "well they're not actively collaborating with fascists yet, just failing to oppose them in any meaningful way."

 

[wareyin]

I'm going to take you on your word for the highlighted. The answer is because voting against doesn't work. If it did we'd have had President Gore in 2000 and recent history would have been very different. But despite two decades of the GOP leaning increasingly fascist and the Dems finding ever more watery sacks of custard to quiver in impotent disdain, it's never enough to consistently win. Turns out votes against Dems + votes for Nazis > votes against Nazis. Sucks, and reflects badly on the American people, but there it is. If you want to win it's not enough to get votes against, you also have to have someone worth voting for. Chuck Schumer's glasses slipping further down his nose ain't it.

For a practical example, consider your most recent local election. Imagine if the D candidate had been caught in some terrible scandal. Embezzling, Epstein list, etc. How bad does it need to be before you're no longer willing to vote for them? Who do you vote for then? Do you vote for the R instead? Or do you leave that box blank, or perhaps find something better to do with your Tuesday? Then just expand that nationally, and realize it takes less than you'd like for the average voter to be dissuaded entirely. Screaming 'VOTE' at them doesn't help, especially if the only good thing anyone can say about their candidate is "well they're not actively collaborating with fascists yet, just failing to oppose them in any meaningful way."

Are we just going to pretend that all of that not voting for Democrats so that they don't have enough members of Congress to actually be able to do anything kind of has a YUGE effect on the Dems ability to do the stuff we want? If they are the minority party, or so narrowly the majority that they require the VP as a tie breaker vote, we can't realistically expect them to be able to do things like Universal Healthcare or raise minimum wage.

Voting against also is a huge motivator. See: Hillary Clinton, for instance. Voting against her brought out people in droves. Republicans vote against Obama, Clinton, Harris, etc, with glee. Which brings me back to people that can't be bothered to vote against the actual fascist who openly said he would be a dictator on day one and had his previous VP and cabinet members campaigning against him (not to mention how his prospective VP called him Hitler!)...yeah, if you don't care enough to try to stop that then I think you're pretty comfortable with team "killing people is my agenda."

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Argue about how we got here all you want, but 20 million plus US citizens are going to see huge price increases on their health insurance in a little over a month, and the Republicans seem to have no problem doing nothing.

Well, not nothing. They are complaining about illegal immigrants, but that's not really helpful.

The price increases aren't news either. Even with the subsidies accounted for, keeping the same tier plan -in my case - from year to year started at $150/month whennthe ACA came into force, and will exceed $400/month this coming year (the "real" premium is approaching 500 to 550$/month on a bronze plan with the subsidy excluded). Ignoring that the subsidy extension was proposed to only be extended by another year... its patently obvious that the subsidy fight does absolutely nothing to resolve premiums going up. The subsidies just mask the price increases. It does not lower them. Until politicians deal with the root of the problem (Obamacare itself)... this subsidy battle will be repeated over and over while premiums continue to rise anyways.