Can you help me understand Motion #2 by Mace? I was lead to believe that “credible” wording didn’t stick, but it sounds like you’re saying it actually did? If so, then yeah it leaves a lot open to being left out of the subpoena on that one word alone.

Consumerism is so deeply engrained in the psyche of the US that it often pushes aside morals or ethics.

We can argue about what is “squandered” or not, but ultimately it’s a subjective word.

To the point of Dems being controlled opposition and relating your example of the ACA: single payer was always an option and one that people were interested in, but capital interests (whom both parties serve) decided it wasn’t going to happen. Then an “American” solution was devised (ACA) which attempted to improve some things. So we got neither of the supposed benefits of either model, and instead ended up with more of a convoluted system that has the alleged benefits of neither. Ultimately it did nothing to alter the course of the healthcare system at large, and here we are in 2025 and the system remains as a tool to extract profit from sick people. People still choose between medicine or rent or food in this country.

Sure ACA doesn’t allow the pre-existing condition thing that insurers did for a long time. But the mandate to get people insured made dollar signs pop into the eyes of capitalists. Overall, they saw a situation where they came out ahead, so that’s what they allowed to happen.

These laws are passed in the interest of capital first, politics second, and common people third. It’s the common trends of agency capture, lobbying, campaign donations, regulatory mingling, privatization, and many other practices that exemplify this as the de facto standard that both of the major parties participate in. And this is how they pave the way for fascism - by encouraging and playing along with the ongoing fusion of state and capital. Both parties drop bombs on brown kids, both build cages and walls (literally and figuratively), both seek to extract wealth from the rest of the world, both subsidize private industry, and both are completely fine with the wealthy and powerful dictating or influencing almost every aspect of our lives in pursuit of profit.

So yeah, it’s squandered opportunity in my eyes because in the grand scheme of things Democrats seek to appease an advantaged class (not you and me) to the detriment of a disadvantaged class.

And I know you’ll be looking around for an example here and there to defend these politicians - save your energy. You need to look at the common trajectory of both of these parties. You can find examples of Republicans doing a good thing or two here and there as well. But again, when the chips are down they’ll all side with the forces that wanna squeeze every drop of blood from every turnip in this world. When tensions rise they might throw you a bone or two to keep you quiet and going to work - after all, someone’s gotta build those bombs and guns and it sure as hell isn’t gonna be them.

Apologists forget that Dems held majority at various times and squandered it.

They had their time to be good people and do the right things. Instead they paved way for fascism in their service to capital.

Everyone complaining about the various things the Dems do is reflective of people seeing them for the farce that they are. In essence, they are controlled resistance - a black hole to swallow up progressive movements and snuff them out before it threatens anything economically.

Isn’t “nothing will fundamentally change” what he said to the donors at a private event? Mission accomplished I guess…

We don’t need more false choice though. This would be a another bourgeois party. The cards might be shuffled a bit and the rhetoric might change but it’d still be playing the same game with the same cards. It’s still a game of “choose your favorite faction of rich people” despite the tweaks in messaging. There will still be an assurance of “nothing will fundamentally change” to the owners and donors.

Lol no.

You’ve never worked construction, at least not on the GC level. You’d be flabbergasted by how much human input and decision-making there is in any building. Constant discussions about constructibility, safety, value, coordination, and on an on. A lot of these discussion lean on experience of the construction team. Robots can’t replace experience of construction workers period. There’s far too many variables that robots or people who have never been “in the field” can’t account for.

Some parts of construction have been helped by automation (see layout robots, CNC cabinetry fabricators, etc.) but that’s drop in the bucket of a massive industry. The human element will not be removed from construction.

No u