this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2024
404 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19043 readers
3880 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

All the racist stuff and culture war BS is a distraction. Economists studied the data and found republicans are bad for the economy, which is what everyone who’s lives through their policies would tell you. They help out their wealthy donors, which is why they get the “good for economy” label but that’s a lie and myth.

Many analyses look at which party is best for the economy. A study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that Democratic presidents since World War II have performed much better than Republicans. On average, Democratic presidents grew the economy by 4.4% each year versus 2.5% for Republicans.

Republicans are just bad at running the country on so many levels.

all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 80 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Pretty much every Republican idea is bad. The party should be dissolved, its members and donors disenfranchised, and their crimes prosecuted.

They are bad people, either through malice or incompetence, it doesn't matter.

[–] NewNewAccount@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

And half the country somehow vehemently disagrees with this.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago

The RNC is slowly being dissolved and will be promptly replaced by the DNC as the dominant conservative party.

[–] Thrillhouse@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

That’s why they have to do this culture war bullshit. Their actual policies are so wildly unpopular that they have to trick people into thinking they can save them from the gay trans liberal cats and dogs or something.

[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 47 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This has been proven since before I could vote. It doesn't matter to their voters.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It does, but the media machine is geared more towards storytelling than reporting or journalism

[–] MrVilliam@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And why do you think that is? Could it be because media outlets are businesses which tend to benefit from Republican policies of helping businesses? And so they feign impartiality but frame stories in a way that serve right wing agendas?

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

Media outlets do what their owners want them to do. Policy that is good for wealthy business owners is not the same as policy that is good for businesses. A good example is the Republican approach to tariffs: a few business owners that the government picks as winners will profit massively from the increased business, but the average American has to pay more to buy everything.

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The entire fucking point of republicanism is “fuck you got mine”. It is designed to bring destruction upon the vast majority for the benefit of the oligarchy. How is this not widely understood?!?

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 9 points 1 week ago

Propoganda & our collective distraction.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago
[–] ObsidianZed@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Yes, they are bad for the economy, but they're also bad for everyone else that isn't them. Economy means nothing if a doctor is refusing to provide you with health care.

[–] Exusia@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

"Which party is better for the economy"

Fuck those 114.6 million people in the US who were food insecure in 2023 source Didn't they know The Economy was booming? Maybe if they knew they wouldn't be starving to death/ facing less than optimal purchases of healthy food.

Which party is better for the actual citizens who live here not the 759 Dragons

*Edit: My reply was meant to be a knee jerk specifically to the title of the article - leading with the question about how which political party is good for the economy, as if humans are second to "line go up". The answer is the same, obviously, but how it was framed makes it a money focused question, rather than a "citizen's issues" question.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 week ago

In terms of what the article is arguing, you could just as easily swap in the term ‘society’ in place of ‘the economy’ and the rest of the facts hold true.

Blue states are far from perfect, but they drastically out-perform red states in terms of health, education, income and environment.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

The Democrats are better by far.

Free School Lunch Child tax Rebate Job Creation Wealth tax Lower middle class taxes Stood with the striking workers just last week Aren't responsible for any of the major economic crashes in my lifetime

The Democrats aren't perfect, I could go for an anti corporate third party. But of the two choices they are head and shoulders better. Especially as long as they're up against the only American president to lose a trade war.

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

those 759 are more valuable than the bottom half

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 7 points 1 week ago

All the racist stuff and culture war BS is a distraction.

It is absolutely not. One of the ways Germany was able to fund itself during WW2 was by displacing and murdering "undesirables," then stealing their property. Eliminate people who don't fit your view of "good citizen" because of their ethnicity and redistribute their wealth to those who remain.

I just figured out why it's called National Socialism.

[–] DJDarren@thelemmy.club 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Here in the UK our economy has been on its knees for the past few years because conservatives work only to funnel as much cash as possible into their mates’ pockets.

Their ‘austerity measures’ crippled the middle and working classes, and literally killed scores of disabled and sick people. But it freed up money for tax cuts to the wealthy, so it was a good job well done for them.

And that’s why I fucking hate conservatives.

[–] WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

But the Daily Moron newspaper told me Labour bad!

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The chart is interesting. Carter is rated higher than I expected.

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

He wasn't a bad president. He was just boring. I would love to go back to boring.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 1 week ago

The economy is bad for the people

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Hoover and Roosevelt really drag the averages around.

The way they calculated, almost half of the "credit" for Democrat growth was Roosevelt.

And hoover single handedly cuts the R number by 30% as a result of him having massive negative growth.

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They addressed this in the article. If both are taken out of the data set the Democrats still come out ahead.

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I realize I didn't explicitly say that, and that in the politically charged environment it was probably assumed I was shilling R.

I love data sets, that's all.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Now that is a paper worth reading.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au -3 points 1 week ago

Both are deeply in bed with big businesses.

Instead of asking whoa better for the economy, ask who values people over business. Its neither.