Breaking the illusion of a 2 party system

  • GardenGeek
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    What did he actually say/ mean?

    My bet is that this is once again a statement generalized/taken out of context to push ones agenda.

    • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Obama argued that reforms that reduced patronage and other forms of political dealing also stripped away some of the transactional tools lawmakers once used to build coalitions.

      He pointed to former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s era, saying reforms before and after Watergate “eliminated or greatly reduced” the ability of political machines to trade votes and favors. “It’s part of the reason why things got a little harder to get done because that was sort of some lubrication…to help to bridge some of the ideological differences that were out there,” he said.

      Reality check: Obama was talking specifically about bribery, patronage and favors. Polls asking Americans whether government corruption is “widespread” capture a much broader perception, making the two measures difficult to compare.

      • GardenGeek
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Thanks for the clarification! So it was generalized and he didn’t deny the widespread corruption in general.

  • nexguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    I think it would probably be shocking for us to see what actually was going on behind closed doors in the 1950s in the U.S.

    Edit: my guess would be the 1870s and 1880s as most corrupt?

  • wangaBanga@feddit.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Remember when we were naive enough to think he’d reverse all those George Dubbya policies?