Those non-violent protests shook them so bad they wanted to charge non-violent Quaker protestors with terrorism.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Not in USAs case.

    On every big economically significant issue of the last 40 years both parties have been on absolutely the same page, none of the candidates would make different choices (at least for both houses and presidents, not sure about state levels, Im not from over there).
    Even policies that one party publicly “opposed” were then carried on by the same party when it came in power (eg Bill Clinton).

    So both parties would and have brought constant deregulation (financial markets especially), the same wars & anything war industry related, public infrastructure cuts (healthcare, schools, etc), taxation of profit, etc.

    They bicker by design on issues that are huge for the non-elite (but meaningless to the elite as they can circumvent such issues), like lgbtq+ and reproductive rights.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      59 Democrats voted for Single Payer, 0 Republicans, it failed

      60 Democrats voted to expand medicaid and protect preexisting conditions, 0 republicans, it passed

      The USA then elected more Republicans. Republicans used that majority to cut taxes for the rich, raise taxes on everyone else, a plan that would have expired in 2026 if the USA didn’t just elect more republicans AGAIN.

      Seems pretty fucking diverse, mate.