Abortion rights were repealed under Democrats, trans rights are being repealed under Democrats, police budgets have increased in response to BLM, and non-stop war is completely bipartisan.

Both sides ARE bad, just because one of them sometimes offers tepid opposition doesn't make them good. Democrats are not on your side either.

Do you think a young child in Libya, killed by a drone strike cares if the person who caused them to die claims to support gay rights or not?

If they are trying to get rid of student loan debt then why were no laws passed for it when they had full control of the congreve and the executive branch? Only am executive order by Biden but no real action. Equal rights for races? Again, I ask you, why under the Democrats have no real laws been passed that have done anything to help that out? Same with gender oppression. Both sides are bad and they are no different. The Democrats and Republicans both are genocidal maniacs.

Neither side tried to get rid of student loan debt. One side just pretended to try.

Oh shut the fuck up man if you're not seeing one hand wash the other on the ruling class shutting that down, you never will. The democrats never intended to pass student loan debt relief, or they wouldn't have softballed something they KNEW the Supreme Court would shut down.

"The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them." -- Julius Nyerere

Both sides are bad though. They are both neoliberals pieces of shit that care infinitely more about their corporate donors than they do about the people. Heck, they only throw scrums to people to pretend that they care.

liberals? On our lemmygrad? It’s more likely than you think!

I typically don't downvote but here you are just factually wrong. "to get rid of student loan debt" would mean to abolish and pass legislation that actually ended all student loan debt in present and future. A feeble attempt at a 'one-time only' debt relief with no further policies or plans to eliminate all future educational costs is just a puppet show. I personally would've benefited from the debt relief, but would've preferred them addressing the rising costs and accessibility of higher education (the root of the problem).

Instead we got a repeal of AA and a move that would've benefited loan companies with a side effect that could possibly make getting future loans for under-privileged individuals that much harder (or more dangerous if loan companies decided to give out increasingly worse contracts if they believe the government will step in and pay the horrendous bills). There are better metrics to compare the parties with, "equal rights" is not one of them as they won't ever exist while class disparity is so rampant.

Equal rights isn't a new developing issue, here's a quote from over 60 years ago,

The assistant director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Hyman Bookbinder, in a frank statement on December 29, 1966, declared that the long-range costs of adequately implementing programs to fight poverty, ignorance and slums will reach one trillion dollars. He was not awed or dismayed by this prospect but instead pointed out that the growth of the gross national product during the same period makes this expenditure comfortably possible. It is, he said, as simple as this: “The poor can stop being poor if the rich are willing to become even richer at a slower rate.” Furthermore, he predicted that unless a “substantial sacrifice is made by the American people,” the nation can expect further deterioration of the cities, increased antagonisms between races and continued disorders in the streets. He asserted that people are not informed enough to give adequate support to anti-poverty programs, and he leveled a share of the blame at the government because it “must do more to get people to understand the size of the problem.” (source, bold by me)

Equal rights "advocates" love to posture and hand-wave historical figures like Dr. King, who rightly pointed out the next step to real equality in his book titled, "Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?".

One of the central themes of the book's messages is that of hope. King reflects upon the Civil Rights Movement. He discusses the question of what African-Americans should do with their new freedoms found in laws such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He concludes that all Americans must unite in order to fight poverty and create an equality of opportunity. King emphasizes that he is neither a Marxist nor a doctrinaire socialist; he instead advocates for a united social movement that would act within both the Republican and Democratic parties. (synopsis from wiki)

It goes "on and on" like this because it's all a show, the steps and problems have been laid bare for decades in the U.S. with no meaningful impact for the causes and class disparity is only getting worse. If the democrats in charge actually passed legislation that addressed inequality, then they wouldn't have anything to dangle in front of the donkey.

edit: If you're gonna give a downvote (probably who I was replying to), don't be a coward and at least bring some conversation to the table with your viewpoints. I'm just gonna have to assume your feelings were hurt and that's the only recourse you have if not.

It's not "both sides bad", it's "they're all on the same side". The majority of Amerikans and non-Amerikans realize this. You are shilling for the bourgeoisie against the proletariat.

This both sides is bad argument is scary because it can cause people to become indifferent. It's scary for minorities. One side is actively trying to get rid of minorities or marginalize them.

Yeah I get that in the context of the working class they are both bad but that's not the only way people are categorized. People's lives are literally being ruined due to the abortion ban and the regression in trans rights and it's clear one side is pushing for it way more than the other.

US politics is one big WWE show and you've taken the bait that the democrats actually "tried". When you realize just how much isn't being done that could be done, and then look at all the same big donor lobbyist money they take in every year, it starts to make sense why the democrats are always "sooo close" to radical change. It's deliberate and I'm tired of people thinking it isn't

Nice copium lib.