Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Myotherside t1_ix18zo3 wrote

LOL you think Dems have actually tried and aren’t just the heel?

−10

[deleted] t1_ix1kwb0 wrote

[deleted]

6

Savings_Statement735 t1_ix1vu6a wrote

It's true that for the last two decades or so the Democrats at the National level have tried very unsuccessfully to work with their Republican counterparts to get things done with bipartisanship and only in the last 2 or 3 years as a collective realized bipartisanship died in the Republican Party when Reagan had lost it to Dementia in his 2nd year. My Father a hard core conservative & Reaganite said as Reagan first midterm was approaching that "the man's mind had left the White House from Dementia and that he'd vote for the Libertarian Candidate in 1984 and did.

2

Language-Aromatic t1_ix21shz wrote

Remember when the obstructionists opposed Obama every chance they had?

4

Savings_Statement735 t1_ix23f4n wrote

Its basically been that way since Reagan. Bill Clinton couldn't get any traction on addressing Healthcare or Minority Rights or Voting Rights, DACA. Anything he tried to do they said NO, ITS AGAINST STRAIGHT WHITE FASCIST VALUES.

4

VHPDingBat t1_ix2k8hf wrote

You sound mentally ill.

−2

Myotherside t1_ix3ltiu wrote

Partisan political narratives are indistinguishable from mental illness

1

Myotherside t1_ix3lk3u wrote

“Bipartisanship” is just excuses for inaction. Look at most bipartisan legislation and you will usually find Republican legislation with more agreeable social language.

1

Myotherside t1_ix3le98 wrote

So you agree with me, but your phrasing was very partisan. Maybe drop the partisan language because you comment comes off as a partisan attack instead of being a serious comment.

Also LOL at the downvotes who think Dems are the answer to anything other than “the choice that isn’t R”

In your comment you also suggest that generation through non fossil fuel means is not possible, because if it was going to get done Dems would do it, which is absolutely laughable if you have anything beyond a surface-level understanding of politics.

1

[deleted] t1_ix3yost wrote

[deleted]

1

Myotherside t1_ixbcz7a wrote

You’re missing the point. Your phrasing suggested that because Dems has a majority that they actually tried and therefore sustainable energy is not possible (implying that we should then relent and build more pipelines).

I see the chameleon act though. This is not your first goalpost moving session

1