maybe if the centralized government gets smart we'll actually have a good time...as it stands our healthcare in the US is abysmal and neither political leaning has any right in name calling - both ideologies have failed miserably.
Y'know the ACA originally had a public option in the bill. Guess which side killed that? Why did we even need an ACA-with-private-insurance-companies anyway? The ACA was initially copy of what was implemented in Massachusetts by Mitt Romney. It's frustrating that Democrats had to compromise just to end up with a system that only somewhat better than what it replaced, and then get blamed for the result.
https://publicintegrity.org/health/elimination-of-public-opt...
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2009/10/did-sen-joe-lieb...
To be clear: he shouldn't have voted against it. But if the Republicans wanted good outcomes neither should any of them.
The group responsible for the actual legislation was the Affordable Care Today Coalition which consisted of a lot of different interests:
https://www.wbur.org/news/2007/04/10/affordability-clash-wbu...
It’s not a frustrating outcome of democracy. It’s a failure of democracy with one party trying to take over and destroy all other opinions by all means necessary, which includes an open revolt and election stealing.
> It’s a failure of democracy with one party trying to take over and destroy all other opinions by all means necessary
Lots of people talk shit but almost everybody is still going about their daily lives in a normal civil manner. Obviously the state of American democracy could be better, but don't pronounce the patient dead just because he tripped and got his knee bloodied.
Indictments on 91 felony charges across three different sovereignties in four different proceedings is...not what most people would describe as zero consequences.
(Also, there are several other active state criminal investigations relating to the fraudulent electors scheme, some of which have produced criminal charges against other people and any of which could very easily also result in further indictments for Trump.)
While I believe in due process, justice delayed is not justice.
And the body that should have sanctioned him (the elected government) voted down any punishment.
There is neither a Constitutional nor a rational basis for a special unique exemption for past Presidents, and fortunately state and federal prosecutors seem to recognize that.
Sure, but using criminal process or any other power of office to punish partisan enemies is a problem whether or not the target is a past leader; there's no special danger around past leaders. if anything, there is less danger around past or current high government officials in general, and past Presidents in particular, because of the extraordinary degree to which those persons tend to be visible and well-connected politically.
But this particular one? Not so much. Vastly better ones elsewhere, if only because they have less veto points and a better amendment process.
The bulk of it was largely designed around the specific circumstances of them 13 colonies->states, many of whom kind of hated each other, and full of appeasements to their different concerns at that time. Everything else has been retrofitted into it since then.
Which ones?
Canada? Japan? Australia? Germany? Even places with significantly unpopular governments like France and the UK don't have a situation where one of the houses of government can't function.
I think if the Italian government is more functional than the US then it's time to realize there is a real problem.
Here's a list of countries by GDP[1]. I'm looking at it and struggling to find a country that is (a) developed[2] and (b) a democracy and (c) doing worse in terms of functional governance than the US.
Turkey and Thailand are two options where they had attempted or actual coups, but neither are classed as developed.
[1] https://www.worldometers.info/gdp/gdp-by-country/
[2] https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/f0773d55-en/1/4/3/index....
Pointing fingers is getting us nowhere. Someone needs to behave rationally and neither side is willing to do that. I don't really care who the worst offender is, we just need someone to step up and not be an offender
[1] https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-spe...
I think it's a mistake to view the two parties as representing two distinct ideologies, and further to believe either parties rhetoric about what constitutes their ideology.
Most of the game of US politics is to see how many terrible/unpopular deeds you can perpetrate against the public on behalf of the moneyed interests (not voters) that supported your campaign without losing votes to the opposition.
Wedge issues and propaganda keep people voting on party lines for candidates that only occasionally act in the majority interest of their own voters, let alone the interests of the greater public.