They are not afraid of being wrong. They don’t actually care about your well being, they are just here to make money for their corporate friends and themselves.
That’s the thing, the left adhere themselves to unwritten rules and current precedences. Whereas the right will break all precedent and scoff at unwritten rules and will try to change the written ones in their favour. It happens everywhere, it’s not just a US thing
Liberals who like the status quo adhere themselves to unwritten rules and current precedences
You’re getting lost in the sauce. These unwritten rules and precedence (and the written rules) aren’t an end in and of themselves, they’re tools you can use to accomplish specific tasks. When a SCOTUS judge decides to use a specific interpretation of the constitution, it’s not because the constitution is a sacred text and god came down to him and showed him the correct way to interpret it, it’s because he understands the effects of promoting that particular interpretation in the way power will be wielded.
When democrats decide to let the rules or the parliamentarian or w/e stop them from doing what their constituents want, it’s not because they just hate the idea of someone breaking a rule, it’s because it gives them an excuse not to do something their donors don’t want.
Democrats so afraid of being wrong they don’t even try to do what’s right.
You misunderstand their incentives. They’re beholden to the billionaires, not to you.
They are not afraid of being wrong. They don’t actually care about your well being, they are just here to make money for their corporate friends and themselves.
More like too much interest in rules
That’s the thing, the left adhere themselves to unwritten rules and current precedences. Whereas the right will break all precedent and scoff at unwritten rules and will try to change the written ones in their favour. It happens everywhere, it’s not just a US thing
We’re talking about democrats here. They’re a firmly right wing party.
You’re getting lost in the sauce. These unwritten rules and precedence (and the written rules) aren’t an end in and of themselves, they’re tools you can use to accomplish specific tasks. When a SCOTUS judge decides to use a specific interpretation of the constitution, it’s not because the constitution is a sacred text and god came down to him and showed him the correct way to interpret it, it’s because he understands the effects of promoting that particular interpretation in the way power will be wielded.
When democrats decide to let the rules or the parliamentarian or w/e stop them from doing what their constituents want, it’s not because they just hate the idea of someone breaking a rule, it’s because it gives them an excuse not to do something their donors don’t want.