Hacker News Reader

Many seem to hold as an axiom that action of any sort is the primary measure for success, and the greatest condemnation should be held for those who wish to prevent it. I've wondered how much of this is genuine and how much is a way of championing their party's political goals when in power, while attempting to sound neutral and devoted only to Democracy.

I'm eager to see how well this holds up when the other team holds power.

View on HN

I don't think people believe that any action is important. The type of action matters.

But when you try to do things that the other side ought to like, and then they block it out of spite, that seems like a good sort of action, and preventing it is worthy of condemnation. For two recent examples, Obamacare is basically a copy/paste of a Republican health care reform proposal, but had heroic efforts to block it by Republicans, and Merrick Garland was presented as the sort of moderate justice that Republicans wanted but Obama would never in a million years nominate, then when he nominated Garland they immediately turned around and refused to even discuss him.

As far as false equivalence between the two major parties goes, Democrats are already talking about trying to work with the new Republican administration and it hasn't even been sworn in yet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com