Why do Biden and the Democrats in Congress want bipartisanship?

[Hardkill]

I know that Biden and many Democrats, including those in both chambers of Congress, want to try to get along with Republicans by making bipartisan deals. This is what Bill Clinton tried to during his presidency and this also what Obama tried to do during his presidency. However, from what I understand, neither Clinton nor Obama were able to really make that happen. Also, I keep hearing from progressive political pundits and commentators that Democrats keep making the same mistake over and over again with trying to "play patty cake" with the Republicans, which has constantly led to the Democrats not getting many new essential laws passed, even when they are officially in control of either chamber of Congress or both chambers of Congress or have the presidency or have control of one chamber of Congress and have the presidency or even when they have the whole government trifecta. Whenever the Republicans have any such control of the government, they never return the favor of really wanting to make bipartisan deals with Democrats. Instead they just disregard the Dems and unilaterally get the legislation they want passed or the executive orders they want done. 

Biden and his press secretary have already been saying a number of times that he wants bipartisanship. Chuck Schumer, who is the newest majority leader has now been letting McConnell pressure him to give what the Republicans want. It also looks like the Schumer and the other democratic senators don't want to nuke the filibuster when they should. 

I am really worried about what this is going to mean for our country. Are the Dems not going to end getting much done because they are simply going to let the Republicans push them around or maybe because the Democrats are being too nice or too naive?

Edited January 24, 2021 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

If Dems weren't nice, then they wouldn't be any better than Repubs.

That's the paradox.

On the one hand you want leaders who are decent and loving, and yet you want them to also savage your enemies, which is the whole source of your wanting decency to begin with.

[Joel3102]

Aren’t you mixing up ideology and tactics? I don’t see any conflict between being progressive and being ruthless when needed 

[Leo Gura]

39 minutes ago, Joel3102 said:

I don’t see any conflict between being progressive and being ruthless

There is an existential conflict.

Which is why left and right are not merely polar opposites. One is more conscious than the other.

[Preety_India]

I do think that the Dems should stop pandering to the Reps. 

Would that actually be practically feasible?

? Tell me a way in which this is possible without causing a rift? 

Whats the ground layout? 

 

Edited January 24, 2021 by Preety_India

[Joel3102]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

There is an existential conflict.

Which is why left and right are not merely polar opposites. One is more conscious than the other.

I agree they aren’t equal. But green can still be ruthless. You know how hard the leftube scene for example rails against conservatives 

[Leo Gura]

24 minutes ago, Joel3102 said:

But green can still be ruthless. You know how hard the leftube scene for example rails against conservatives 

It can be, but why would you want that? Be careful what you wish for.

[Preety_India]

27 minutes ago, Joel3102 said:

I agree they aren’t equal. But green can still be ruthless. You know how hard the leftube scene for example rails against conservatives 

If green rises, it will rise up like a Godzilla. 

 

[Hardkill]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

If Dems weren't nice, then they wouldn't be any better than Repubs.

That's the paradox.

On the one hand you want leaders who are decent and loving, and yet you want them to also savage your enemies, which is the whole source of your wanting decency to begin with.

 

7 hours ago, Preety_India said:

If green rises, it will rise up like a Godzilla. 

 

 

8 hours ago, Joel3102 said:

I agree they aren’t equal. But green can still be ruthless. You know how hard the leftube scene for example rails against conservatives 

 

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

It can be, but why would you want that? Be careful what you wish for.

So, then are progressives wrong? 

Or are the establishment Democrats in Congress and Dems not going to get much done because their ethical views will continue to hold them back from doing what needs to be done for the USA?

 

 

[Willie]

If there’s a fervent push to the left equal to the recent push to the right, that would lead to another Civil War. We need a common ground somewhere in between. Look how triggered and butthurt conservatives already are without the antagonizing. 

[Preety_India]

The left is supposed to be calm even when antagonized. 

And the right gets flared up even when they aren't being antagonized. 

Some irony. 

 

[Willie]

2 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

The left is supposed to be calm even when antagonized. 

And the right gets flared up even when they aren't being antagonized. 

Some irony. 

 

Higher standards of behavior for higher consciousness.

[Preety_India]

1 minute ago, Willie said:

Higher standards of behavior for higher consciousness.

Yea I get it then they should just shut up with their low consciousness 

 

[Willie]

7 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Yea I get it then they should just shut up with their low consciousness 

 

If your worldview was endangered, I don’t think you’d be happy about it either.

[Preety_India]

4 minutes ago, Willie said:

If your worldview was endangered, I don’t think you’d be happy about it either.

Well nobody wants their worldview endangered 

Not even Saints. 

 

[Emerald]

The reason is because the owner class benefits most from right-wing legislation as Republicans are for bigger tax cuts (for the wealthy) and small government (aka BIG corporate sector) with fewer regulations on the powers of big business.  So, Republican legislation benefits the wealthiest Americans, while mostly screwing over 99.5% of the population.

So, it's to the owner class's benefit for Republicans to get their way as much as possible. 

And it's also in the owner class's benefit for Democrats to always want to "reach across the aisle" and concede and give Republicans what they want... because what Republicans want IS what the owner class wants.

Trust me, Democrats are not playing patty-cake because they're unaware of how to play politics well. Trust me, they know what they're doing.

They're playing patty cake because politicians (both Republican and Democrat) get a bunch of kickbacks by serving the interests of billionaires, corporations, and industries. And that means shifting the political landscape as far to the economic right as possible. 

[Emerald]

16 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

If Dems weren't nice, then they wouldn't be any better than Repubs.

That's the paradox.

On the one hand you want leaders who are decent and loving, and yet you want them to also savage your enemies, which is the whole source of your wanting decency to begin with.

Democrats and Republicans are fundamentally playing for the same team. The differences are there, certainly. And I'd rather have Dems in office for that reason.

But in the most fundamental ways, the "niceness" in their roles as moral leaders is window dressing. Of course, with Trump, we can see that that window dressing and (at least the illusion of) moral leadership matters. But it's still just window dressing.

And the tolerance that Dems show is an illusion... because their constituents are nicer than the Republican's constituents. So, of course they have to seem nicer and more tolerant.

But they're not nicer or more tolerant when they continue to support the Military Industrial Complex and American imperialism in so many foreign countries and support 2/3 of the world's dictators. And they're not nicer when they continue to support Big Pharma and the private insurance industry when all other developed nations have socialized medicine, and 30k+ people die every year due to lack of insurance or under-insurance. 

The real reason why they're always trying to "reach across the aisle" is because Republican legislation benefits their wealthy donors. So, it is Democrats' role to pretend to be for the average person, while being as adaptable and pliable as possible and to mostly concede to Republicans. Where it is Republicans job to get their agendas through by any means necessary... including obstruction.

And it's all because this is what benefits their donors. Nothing more. 

Edited January 25, 2021 by Emerald

[Preety_India]

@Emerald you're just bullshitting. Dems don't have any sinister motives. 

 

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Democrats and Republicans are fundamentally playing for the same team. The differences are there, certainly. And I'd rather have Dems in office for that reason.

But in the most fundamental ways, the "niceness" in their roles as moral leaders is window dressing. Of course, with Trump, we can see that that window dressing and (at least the illusion of) moral leadership matters. But it's still just window dressing.

Except it is not mere window dressing, and if Trumpism didn't reveal that you, I don't know what will.

Republicans are less morally developed.

Now, this does not mean that Dems are super morally developed. But they are more morally developed than Repubs.

Quote

And the tolerance that Dems show is an illusion... because their constituents are nicer than the Republican's constituents. So, of course they have to seem nicer and more tolerant.

It's not an illusion, their niceness just has it's limits and isn't as nice as you desire.

Quote

But they're not nicer or more tolerant when they continue to support the Military Industrial Complex and American imperialism in so many foreign countries and support 2/3 of the world's dictators. And they're not nicer when they continue to support Big Pharma and the private insurance industry when all other developed nations have socialized medicine, and 30k+ people die every year due to lack of insurance or under-insurance.

Again, these are all relative things. Just because they support the Military Industrial Complex does not make them less nice. You can do both.

Quote

The real reason why they're always trying to "reach across the aisle" is because Republican legislation benefits their wealthy donors. So, it is Democrats' role to pretend to be for the average person, while being as adaptable and pliable as possible and to mostly concede to Republicans. Where it is Republicans job to get their agendas through by any means necessary... including obstruction.

And it's all because this is what benefits their donors. Nothing more. 

You over-simply things.

This attitude of blame-everything-on-elites is foolish. As we saw with MAGA, the vulgar non-elites are worse than the elites.

If the elites will price gouge you on healthcare, the non-elites will dress like Vikings and rape your grandma for sport.

Elite vs non-elite is not the correct dichotomy. That's not the real issue. The fact is that non-elites are ignorant and they elect idiot politicians who reflect their own idiocy. And THEN those politicians of course exploit and sell them out. Because that's exactly what a non-elite would do if placed in such a position of power.

A non-elite is just an elite who hasn't achieved money and power yet. If you give a non-elite the opportunity to be an elite, he will take it and run with it.

[Jennjenn]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

A non-elite is just an elite who hasn't achieved money and power yet. If you give a non-elite the opportunity to be an elite, he will take it and run with it.

I agree with this statement and it reminded me of something that happened to me yesterday... While shopping for things for my house I started to feel so much gratitude. I was in poverty and homeless once. And after many years of hard work things have completely turned around for me. 
 

But, I remember feeling that I want to keep this socioeconomic status forever. Not only for me but for my children and their children, and their children’s children. I want not 1 of my descendants to experience what I experienced. And that feeling is so primal that for a moment I understood why the elites cling to the status quo so much. They KNOW it is a scary world out there. Sometimes I feel like they’re more scare or just as scare than anybody else.