• ɔiƚoxɘup@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    rant: If he can, he should. He needs to focus on outcomes and do what he said he’d do, though, otherwise he can’t and shouldn’t get reelected and will be unable to advocate for what’s good.

    One thing I’ve seen the democratic party do is kneecap very important priorities by allowing focus to be diverted. It’s important to be green. It’s important to use union labor. DEI is important. Its all important, but if you’re trying to house he houseless, focus on that and once you’ve found a way to do that, then do it green. Or at least have enough prioritization skill to walk and chew gum, but at least do what you said you’d fucking do!

    You absolutely cannot solve every problem at once and if you try, that’s how Republicans win.

    So, if you have 2 builders and one can do it greener for the same price, by all means, choose that, but you can’t let it be the dealbreaker that prevents you from haveing even a basic level of success.

    A good example of this is the chips act. All of the individual requirements are important and meaningful, but the problem is they have done a lot to prevent the actual thing from getting done. They tried to solve everything at once.

    So should he build green? Absolutely! If he can do that, along with the other goals. And should he be DEI? Absolutely! If that doesn’t compromise the goal of housing homeless people. But the problem of the Democratic Party is that it has no fucking focus and it allows ideological priorities to stop them from doing any actual real work so many different times.

    The ideology cannot be a binary and success is measured by outcomes.

    Not everything is a purity test.

    /rant

    Edit: for clarity and for rant tag.