I’ve been wondering for a bit why during the time the Democrats controlled the legislature, executive, and judicial branches during Obama’s first term in 2008 more wasn’t accomplished. Shouldn’t that have been the opportunity to make Row V Way law and fix the electoral college? I understand the recession was going on but outside of Obamacare getting passed which didnt go far enough it seems like they didn’t really do much with all that power. Are there other important accomplishments from this time that didn’t get the news they deserved? It seems like the voters have done their job in the past to elect people to fix things and yet we are still here begging people to vote to fix issues like abortion rights.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    1 month ago

    Routine abuse of the filibuster rules by Republicans was a big part of it. Not the only reason, but a fairly major one as I recall.

    And while I am a Democrat and I vote that way, I very readily admit the Democrats often bring a book to a gun fight when it comes to politics. They have good intentions but then they get steamrollered on things like SCOTUS appointments…

    • Twinklebreeze @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Democrats have been playing by the rules and norms for far too long. Norms only matter if both teams follow them. Same thing with the rules. If Republicans will change the rules so that they win Democrats have to follow suit or make it illegal. When one side plays dirty, the other can either play dirty or lose. Moral high ground gains us nothing.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 month ago

        The main difference is:

        Republicans do stuff then Democrats challenge it thru the courts.

        Dems challenge their own stuff first, and if they think it’s right after a year or two, they start talking about if they should do it. And Republicans will still challenge it thru the courts.

        You can argue over which path is morally the right one.

        But no one has a legitimate argument that says republicans aren’t more effective.

        They’re skipping steps that take us years to complete.

        I mean, Biden talked about all types of shit he would do when elected. And his first day he said he’d start looking into if he was allowed to do any of it.

        trump ain’t waiting to ask anyone if he can do something. He’s just going to do shit, and we’re going to have to try and fight a bunch of battles at once, all the while his policies are in effect.

        It’s not that they’re fighting dirty and we’re fighting clean.

        It’s that when the gun goes off to start the race, we start stretching so we won’t cramp up.

        Doesn’t matter how slow Republicans are if we give them a 10 minute head start on a 100m sprint.

        • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          This is it. Trump didn’t give a flying shit at all if anything he did was legal, he just went for it, and it worked.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          trump ain’t waiting to ask anyone if he can do something. He’s just going to do shit, and we’re going to have to try and fight a bunch of battles at once, all the while his policies are in effect.

          That IS fighting dirty

    • TheJack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      Though if I recall correctly, filibuster rule can be removed with 51% majority but obviously Democrats are too nice to remove that.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        While I disagree with it, there is a valid argument that getting rid of the filibuster would become an absolute disaster once Republicans gain the majority.

    • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      The current state of US politics is a direct consequence of Mitch McConnell’s campaign of obstruction and spin. When we go to civil war in November and your fellow Americans are bleeding out in the streets because we wouldn’t get on board with support for Zionist genocide, think of him.

  • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    1 month ago

    I disagree with your premise. The 111th Congress got a lot done. Here’s a list of major legislation.

    • Lily Ledbetter Act made it easier to recover for employment discrimination, and explicitly overruled a Supreme Court case making it harder to recover back pay.
    • The ARRA was a huge relief bill for the financial crisis, one of the largest bills of all time.
    • The Credit CARD Act changed a bunch of consumer protection for credit card borrowers.
    • Dodd Frank was groundbreaking, the biggest financial reform bill since probably the Great Depression, and created the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, probably one of the most important pro-consumer agencies in the federal government today.
    • School lunch reforms (why the right now hates Michelle Obama)
    • Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP or SCHIP): healthcare coverage, independent of Obamacare, for all children under 18.
    • Obamacare itself, which also includes comprehensive student loan reform too.

    That’s a big accomplishment list for 2 years, plus some smaller accomplishments like some tobacco reform, some other reforms relating to different agencies and programs.

    Plus that doesn’t include the administrative regulations and decisions the administrative agencies passed (things like Net Neutrality), even though those generally only last as long as the next president would want to keep them (see, again, Net Neutrality).

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not to mention he got that all done with a majority that was actually “guaranteed” to be able to do stuff for all of a few weeks, during which his senate majority actively sabotaged Obamacare from being a public option healthcare act, because fuckin Manchincrats just have to be the singularly most determined to be killjoy assholes on the face of the entire fucking planet

      • thallamabond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        Joe Lieberman was his name, while he did not act alone, I’ll always remember he took the public option from us.

        Also he founded No Labels, the “Unity” party that does not have a platform, but does have billionaire donors

    • BackpackCat@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Thanks for this info. I always kinda felt like I must be missing something. That is a significant amount of stuff to get done especially in the face of the insane amount of filibustering the Republicans did during this time that others pointed out. I mean I still wish more was done but it gives me hope that if we can somehow weather the storm of fascists that some good legislation can be passed in the future even in the face of opposition.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 month ago

    because those are conservative democrats who thought there was still a sensible republican party “to work with”

    most of Obamas “accomplishments” were republican sourced ideas.

    the democrats haven’t acted progressively in many decades. Obama was a lame duck from day 1

  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 month ago

    but outside of Obamacare getting passed which didnt go far enough

    You’re way underestimating and underemphasizing Obamacare, and the impact it took to get it into law.

    Obamacare was a huge get for the Democrats, and while it wasn’t Medicare for all that we all wanted, especially with the Republicans fighting tooth and nail to deny him, that was a huge win.

    It took a lot of effort in time to get Obamacare, which took all the oxygen out of the room for doing other things.

    Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

      • Twinklebreeze @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yeah. Seems like a waste of effort to me. If they’re scraping movies and books illegally then you aren’t gonna stop em with a link at the bottom of a comment.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        Still going to poison the results and be embarrassing when the LLM starts putting creative commons licensing in its output.

        • catalog3115@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          😂 but I think 🤔 they have some cleaning process, I don’t know exactly what is called but they remove all anomalies like this 😔. 👍 If this works

        • cm0002@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yea, but propublica has money to hire lawyers and can actually take companies to court over it.

          Are you prepared to shell out potentially 10’s of thousands of dollars to actually defend your license? That’s my biggest question in this, because if not it really is a waste of time and effort.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Are you prepared to shell out potentially 10’s of thousands of dollars to actually defend your license? That’s my biggest question in this, because if not it really is a waste of time and effort.

            Well if the license is flagrantly ignored I’m sure Creative Commons would probably have something to say about it.

            Having said that, I meant for you to also go to the top of that link conversation to read everything that’s been discussed, including my answer to the question you just asked.

            Also, we’re really derailing the topic of the post.

            Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

            • cm0002@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I did, but you never really answer the question, are you financially prepared and willing to actually defend your license in court?

              And also your link has become incredibly obnoxious, you don’t need all those “~”

              • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                Look, it makes them happy, it’s free, and it doesn’t cost you anything. It just kinda doesn’t seem like a big deal.

              • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                I did, but you never really answer the question, are you financially prepared and willing to actually defend your license in court?

                I did, both in the link that I originally gave you, as well as replying to your comment directly.

                And also your link has become incredibly obnoxious, you don’t need all those “~”

                That’s a problem with your mobile client, you’ll need to speak to the devs of your client about that.

                It’s not supporting subscript and superscript fonts correctly, per Lemmy’s help page on formatting comments. Also discussed in that original link I gave you.

                If we could stop derailing the current topic?

                Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

    • cygon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I think that is really the core of it.

      I remember that it took months of discussions, compromises and buttering up specific opposition members to get it passed, and that it was a trimmed-down version of the original Medicare plans.

      I wish I could remember where, but when answering a question very similar to the OP’s - perhaps in an interview? - Obama explained that he would have very much liked to tackle two big things: health care and climate, but that his party’s resources were stretched too thin to do both at the same time and that he knew they would loose control of the house in the midtems (2011), so he picked one thing.

      Table listing who held the house and the senate during the Obama presidency from 2009 to 2017

    • GodlessCommie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Between the time that Obama was sworn in and the ACA getting passed Congress had passed 161 other substantial bills. The major one that was shelved being the freedom of choice act which had already been written and waiting in a vote since 2003.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Congress had passed 161 other substantial bills

        [citation required] (bolded part)

        Also, it was all over the news and online and in papers that the ACA and trying to get it passed over the finish line was a lot of hard work, that took a lot of time and effort, that it ‘sucked up all the oxygen in the room’ for other stuff.

        Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

  • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    So, I don’t think there’s a good single answer to this question.

    Obama isn’t and wasn’t as progressive as he was (and sometimes is, mostly by Republicans) framed. The democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for a few months, and even then, Joe Lieberman gummed up the works big time on getting the ACA through. Somebody mentioned that they wasted a lot of time trying to get bipartisan support for the ACA, and it’s true. They spent months negotiating against themselves with the republicans, whose answer was always “no”, and by the time they were done, the ACA was a shell of what it could have been. After the ACA, which I must add is basically comprised of all the non-insane (read: mostly pointless) reforms the Republicans were proposing as well as some more rational reforms, the right-wing hype machine started red-lining (as in tachometers, not the racist housing policy, though I guess that could also work since they really didn’t want that black man living in that house) and you’d have thought we had an actual communist overthrow of the government on our hands. The democrats absolutely bungled the PR (the more things change, the more they stay the same, huh) and pissed off everyone outside the party and made everyone inside the party facepalm. After the supermajority disappeared, the republicans started cynically abusing the filibuster and turned the rest of Obama’s presidency into anything from a lame duck to just one (republican caused) crisis after another.

    Tl;Dr a lot of the democrats aren’t progressives, and we had a lot more of the old cold war blue dog crowd that Biden is from than we do now, mixed with absolutely bunglefucking both the political strategy and PR around the ACA and not being able to get past the filibuster once the supermajority disappeared.

    P.S. it’s worth noting that, at the time, Roe was considered settled law. From what I recall, nobody was too anxious about the SCOTUS citing 400 year old witch hunters and overturning pretty well settled and accepted case law. The republicans were generally seeking to overturn Roe via the federal legislature/executive at the time.

    • GodlessCommie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Roe was never considered settled law, which is why there has been numerous bills written to codify it into law. The longest standing one has been Barbara Boxers Freedom of choice act written in 2003 which kept getting shelved by Pelosi every year it was introduced, including 2009 when Obama promised he would sign it his first day in office

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Thanks for this. I wasn’t aware of that. All of my experience around Roe was seeing republicans wanting it dealt with in the legislature/executive.

        Gotta love Pelosi, just when the Democrats are in danger of not spilling the spaghetti, she reliably shows up to make a disaster of it. She’s got, like, the anti-McConnel*.

        *McConnel is, imo, one of the most talented statesmen of my lifetime. It’s a goddamn shame he’s used his talents for evil. It’s a little bewildering to imagine how different a place the US could be if he’d been on the side of the people. It’s also a powerful statement of what a wreck the GOP has become that Mitch couldn’t control the MAGA/freedom caucus members anymore. I hope the whole thing just implodes on itself and we get something new and less horrible.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    Because “control” doesn’t mean much in the Senate unless you have 60 votes to break a filibuster.

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      And that they’ll actually follow through with breaking that filibuster,

      Fuckin’ Manchin and Sinema, the fuckin’ bootlicking little tagnuts.

  • TheJack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Like it or not, the United States are of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations.

    Now I totally disagree with Republicans on almost everything especially since 2014 but one thing I like about them is, how to pass the actual laws, and how to put justices in supreme court.

    No matter how wrong are they, or who paid (directly or indirectly) to pass the laws… when they have majority, they just steamrolls.

    Democrats on the other hand are just talks.

    Edit: Though, on a larger scale, I think Democracy is a failed experiment. But that’s entirely a different debate.

    Look at just one example:

    In Europe, Apple was told accept outside payments. Apple made mockery of the wish of the people they are making money from… and made it more expensive to use outside payment system.

    Now take a guess, if it was China asked Apple to implement something serious… do you think Apple would be able to make mockery of Chinese government and still survive in China?

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    You can’t ‘fix’ the electoral College. It’s in the Constitution and will never be overturned because getting rid of it means that the small states lose a lot of power. As for the rest, Obama was trying to be a Left Center leader, not a radical Leftist.

    • hime0321@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      If only we could, idk, amend the constitution. And small states having the power to make a more popular voted candidate lose is fucking ridiculous. Also something like 80% of Americans votes will basically be ignored because they don’t live in closely divided states. So fuck the electoral college.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    “They go low, we go high.” Translated “they break the rules and try to overthrow the government, we roll over and beg for more.”

  • mydude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    In short, they didn’t want to. The reality is they are all moderate republicans, which in itself is an oxymoron. Don’t believe me, here is Obama saying just that; https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJIlZxHfclc Now imagine you somehow get total control of all braches, and to top it off 3 weeks filibuster proof. You can do anything, but you don’t really want change. What do you do? Well implement RomneyCare, call it ObamaCare and leave out the public option, which will ensure it be a giveaway to big pharma. Seems good at first glance, but leaving out the public option really killed it, as they intended.

  • neidu2@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Because back then the democratic party didn’t really tow the party line as well as republicans. They’ve gotten better at it, but still behind. When the R voted NO in unison on most things championed by Obama, D couldn’t be relied upon to counter with enough YES votes. The party was too fractured, and while they still kind of are, they at least present a somewhat unified front nowadays.