Except that Clinton and Obama both raised taxes on the wealthy. Or that Obama enacted the largest expansion of the welfare state in since Johnson. Or that Wall Street turned on the Democrats with a vengeance after Dodd-Frank. Or that pretty much every Democrat in the Senate with presidential aspirations has endorsed Bernie's Medicare-for-all bill. Or that a federal jobs guarantee has become the default position of the Democratic Party virtually overnight. It's one thing to say that these measures don't go far enough. But to act like there are no significant differences between them and the Republicans is nothing more than vulgar Chomskyism.

 

Clinton raised taxes on everyone. So did Reagan and Bush the elder. Obama didn't raise taxes on the wealthy. He just let the Bush tax cuts expire, and even that was pretty tough to pull off while holding Congress. Wall Street was pretty supportive of Obama and Hillary and plenty of other candidates to have turned on the party with the vengeance. That simply didn't happen. Dodd-Frank was written by lobbyists to ensure that "Too Big To Fail" remained a thing. There are indeed differences between the two parties. But again, I'll say it for the third time -- they both support free trade. They both support broad military intervention. They both support deregulation. And I covered the tax stuff. When Medicare For All ends up in the party platform, then I'll believe the party supports it.

 

Except that Clinton and Obama both raised taxes on the wealthy. Or that Obama enacted the largest expansion of the welfare state in since Johnson. Or that Wall Street turned on the Democrats with a vengeance after Dodd-Frank. Or that pretty much every Democrat in the Senate with presidential aspirations has endorsed Bernie's Medicare-for-all bill. Or that a federal jobs guarantee has become the default position of the Democratic Party virtually overnight. It's one thing to say that these measures don't go far enough. But to act like there are no significant differences between them and the Republicans is nothing more than vulgar Chomskyism.

 

Clinton raised taxes on everyone. So did Reagan and Bush the elder. Obama didn't raise taxes on the wealthy. He just let the Bush tax cuts expire, and even that was pretty tough to pull off while holding Congress. Wall Street was pretty supportive of Obama and Hillary and plenty of other candidates to have turned on the party with the vengeance. That simply didn't happen. Dodd-Frank was written by lobbyists to ensure that "Too Big To Fail" remained a thing. There are indeed differences between the two parties. But again, I'll say it for the third time -- they both support free trade. They both support broad military intervention. They both support deregulation. And I covered the tax stuff. When Medicare For All ends up in the party platform, then I'll believe the party supports it.

 

 

im all matters that matter to me there both the same imo