613
Democratic President rebuilds economy, just in time to hand it off to Trump — again
(www.huffpost.com)
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
613 points (97.1% liked)
politics
19241 readers
2259 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with assertions like this is that they can never be conclusively proven or disproven. Literally every single president (at least during my lifetime) has blamed their predecessor for all of the problems plaguing the country and took credit for everything that improved, while their predecessor claimed credit for laying the groundwork and blamed their predecessor for all the challenges they faced.
The fundamental issue is that the same experiment can never be conducted twice under controlled conditions, because the world doesn't stop spinning and whatever the other guy did, he did, and we can't turn back time in order to find out how his opponent's choices would have played out. Sure, you can always pick and choose some factoids in order to spin a compelling "what if" scenario, but ultimately there's simply too many variables at play in order to reach a sufficiently solid conclusion.
Say you put a clock on humanity. One depicted by the earth itself, and it's ability to support our type of lifeform. If one president pushes that clock forward, and another tries to slow it, are they so easily comparable? When people claim they care about kids, what they really should be meaning is the future of humanity... Or else they are really taking away the liberties of those children to be able to grow up and live a life of the same quality as the generations before them.
Now categorize those presidents again as whom has attempted to use the information they had in the capacity they had for changes to benefit future generations.
We continue to debate it.. but the clock has not stopped ticking.
The problem with that thought experiment is that different people have different ideas about what "slowing it down" means. One man's poison is another man's medicine.
There's nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so.
It's not a thought experiment, it's reality. Every world leader knows it. The oil companies know it, the coal companies know it, the car companies know it, the overseas shipping companies know it, the agricultural companies know it, the billionaires know it, and they use their money to contort media outlets and information pushed to the population for manipulation. To line their pockets in the thought that either
a. I'll be dead, the fuck do I care
b. Maybe someone in the future can find a way to undo the deeds I did in time, but not my problem.
It's life in multiple choice my friend, and humanity is straight fucked in their hands
(The choice is the same)
What I'm trying to tell you is that literally each and everyone of them firmly believe(s/d) that what they're doing is the right thing and absolutely necessary for the future of the country, and that their predecessor was a liar and a crook. They wouldn't make it halfway to the Oval Office without that conviction. You may disagree, and that's your God given right, but I'm afraid that's just how democracy works.