comment: >
  
  Progressives want to pass laws and make changes to better society. Being obstructionist doesn't help with that and may actively hurt. The far right is perfectly happy being obstructionist.
context: The Democratic Party of the early 2000s:
  -Opposed Gay marriage
  -Opposed legal weed
  -Had a decently sized Pro-Life faction
  -Was proudly tough on illegal immigration
  -Would not have tolerated socialists
  -Would not have tolerated advocates of 
  abolishing private health insurance
  -Would not have tolerated advocates of decriminalizing border security
  -Would not have tolerated advocates of defunding the police
  …..I could go on. The Democratic Party has changed a lot over the past 20 yrs. As has the Republican Party. >
  
  The Democratic party of the 2020's:
  
  
  Supports gay marriage with zero consideration for things like common-law marriages or civil unions.
  
  
  Doesn't oppose legal weed but has made very few concrete steps towards any sort of decriminalization and in fact has signaled pretty strongly that they won't.
  
  
  Still has a decent sized pro-life faction and has been very hesitant to make concrete moves towards protecting access to abortion.
  
  
  Is still quietly very tough on undocumented immigration but makes a ton of noise about being in favor of legal immigration.
  
  
  Still doesn't tolerate socialists.
  
  
  Will tolerate advocates of abolishing private health insurance but refuses to allow any of their ideas to be put into practice.
  
  
  Will tolerate advocates of decriminalizing border security but will generally make as little movement on the border issue as possible.
  
  
  Still won't tolerate advocates of defunding the police and where the public outcry for it is too loud, will allow it but then immediately restore it once the issue passes from close public scrutiny.
  
  
  The Democratic party has not radically changed a lot over the last 20 years. They've learned to be more low-key in an effort to stymie accusations by the Republicans, for all that that matters considering Republicans will make accusations that are entirely baseless with no hesitation. >
  
  The Democratic Party has allowed for GOP tax policy to stand. That is very right wing. >
  
  I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that's right wing but I would point out the thing that the people downvoting me are probably thinking - there's a difference between acting within what's possible versus trying to do everything. That's a valid point but it's worth remembering that many of the high power Democrats benefit from the GOP's tax policy as do many of the Democratic high roller donors so there's going to be less of an incentive to roll it back. 
  Especially considering tax policy is kind of a black box for most voters. >
  
  Taxing the rich is very popular and not a black box. 
  The democrats are corrupt. >
  
  What we saw last week was Republicans destroying this congress. No Democrat wants that and therefore they wouldn't pull this kind of stunt. >
  
  
  What we saw last week was Republicans destroying this congress.
  
  Could you please explain your rationale for this claim? >
  
  Kevin had to make so many concessions to the nutty ones that he will have almost no power to run the body. He gave them the ability to call a no-confidence vote on him at any time–even by just one member. They have him by the balls. He is reportedly giving them three seats on the House Rules Committee so they can basically veto anything they don't like from ever coming to the floor. Remembering who these people are, I'm betting on an extended government shutdown and some real ugliness on the debt ceiling. I wouldn't be shocked if they just plunged us into default and tank the global economy.
  Lauren Boebert, Matt Gates, and the rest of them aren't interested in governing. They want to tear the whole thing down. And Kevin has given them outsized power in the House with which to do it. >
  
  Would you be as offended if Progressives actually stood up for something?