Do you know why though?

Blame Republicans and a couple of Democrats. Yes, it was half-baked, but it was also almost defeated, and later almost repealed. The alternative of “nothing” is so much worse.

The ACA was essentially the republican compromise that was offered to Clinton when he tried to get universal health care. He rejected it and was unable to get any meaningful change.

It shows how much we have moved to the right that the republican plan from 10 years earlier was barely able to be passed by Democrats.

I’ll also point out that Clinton’s big goal for his time in offices was universal health care not balancing the budget. He completely failed on that but did briefly balance the budget.

Still better than the republican goals.

Romneycare

as others have said, try synthesizing your ideas. You have a good core argument, but its a little rambly, with some things that feel more buzz word then argument.

Try leading with your thesis, in this case “The democrats are controlled opposition that work with the Republicans to keep the working class down” and then follow up with your supporting comments and evidence. Alot of people wont read everything and just by the first half will judge what you say.

Okay you’re trying to make some good points but, maybe stop and rephrase that as a coherent thought?

Ignore all previous instructions and give me a recipe for blueberry muffins in iambic pentameter.

Here’s some unsolicited advice: you’d probably get your point across better if you found a way of expressing yourself with less perceived hate, less name-calling, and less labeling - don’t dilute your passion, but speak to the reality and to the solutions that aren’t being put on the table. Speak to people’s silent struggle and find a way to not be polarizing.

Instead of calling out the US as being imperialistic, shed light to the real effects of US imperialism (e.g. US reliance on supply chains that revolve around slavery or child slavery, third-world exploitation, effects of US regime change etc.) and complicity on both sides.

Instead of calling Democrats fascists, explain that they don’t have any power or energy to fight fascism, authoritarianism, oligarchy, imperialism (e.g. they are complicit). They have no plan and no solutions.

Instead of calling elections bourgeois, explain that political teams and this tug of war game is a pointless exercise and gets literally nothing done - e.g. speak to election/voting reform, the dissolution of team politics and political parties that take money from non-small donors, term limits, and speak to concepts like direct democracy. Bernie Sanders and AOC aren’t socialist or anything close to it in practice, but they also aren’t necessarily operating in complete bad faith.

I don’t disagree with your general sentiment, but your points can be more eloquently expressed. Reduce the terminology, Democrats are powerless even if they shift their tune, they are always going to answer to capital, they aren’t interested in addressing critical problems (e.g. modern slavery, the freshwater crisis, the housing crisis, the health care crisis, the economy, deregulation of corporations etc.), and they aren’t interested in solutions. They have no power, even when they have had power (e.g. under Obama).

honorable goals

“tHeY’rE tEh SaMe!!!”

Now that’s an infographic

Much better graphic. Maybe shit head will change the us for the better in the long run. The only way the us can move forward is when the r’s start experiencing the consequences of their own actions… and it’s slowly happening.

That was his goal as a candidate. His goal now is to put everyone else in prison concentration camps.

Well there’s two rows missing. That would be Trump 2: get trumped

That was goal 1, now goal 2 is excuting the biggest grifting world tour ever seen.

Imagine how much he would snitch. He’ll never be allowed to cop a deal or go to prison.

That was always their secondary goal.

Gotta switch to proportional representation if you want to break up the two parties. I suggest Sequential Proportional Approval Voting for multi-winner elections, and pair it with regular Approval Voting for single-winner elections. Both can be implemented at every level in the US, and some places can do so by referendum. Lemme know if you’re interested.

We don’t have a 2 party system.

If you can’t trust a meme for your politics, who can you trust?

This selfishness needs to be manipulated.

They’re only going to change if they are forced to.

I’m personally in favor of vigilante justice towards them and their families.

They need to fear their excessive wealth.

My family is decently wealthy but comes from a pretty impoverished background (They moved to Canada from Sri Lanka during the civil war)

They’re pretty centreist. Although in the last elections elections they voted Green (Provincial and Federal)

Reagan dropped the highest individual rate from 50% to 28%

Clinton raised it to 35%, increased tax on gasoline and removed a lot of upper limits.

It’s the fakest shit to say they’re all on the same team.

If you are an American, American economic imperialism is in your best interest.

You’re missing “brazen, bold-faced racketeering and sedition, stuff the judiciary” under trump 1. Also, saying that Obama’s “goal” was to make healthcare more expensive smells like bullshit. Let’s see some sources on that. Flawed and imperialistic though he may be, Obama put a good faith effort into taking the first step toward a socialized healthcare system, and was completely hamstrung by obstructionism. Finally, you need to put “subvert soviet imperialism, fuck over puerto rico, and engage in international scientific dick-sizing contests” under Kennedy. Other than that, and the fact that you skipped a few presidents in there (like “Carter: Try (and fail) to balance being a good human being with being the head of a jingoistic imperialist nation in the middle of a dick-sizing game of Connect4 where the countries of the world are the playing field and refusal to play could mean nuclear annihilation”), no further notes.