Steve CoxKonto zweryfikowane

The rhetoric surrounding guns - again, on both “sides” - is *designed* to be polarizing, not inclusive. Because polarization is what both parties rely on in order to gain and maintain power. Look at how both “sides” speak about the other. It’s by design.

The rhetoric is *designed* to shut people down. This polarization is the primary method of dividing people along partisan lines, putting Democrats or Republicans into power despite the fact that they vote *together* on all of the stuff that impacts the most people.

Together, they deregulate banks (which will soon harm everybody but the banks, again), push for endless war, extend domestic-surveillance powers to our Toddler-In-Chief, increase his military budget, block the importation of pharmaceuticals from Canada, etc.

This entire thing is manipulation, because once they get into power - *if* they get into power - they will *not* pass *any* meaningful gun legislation unless it’s bipartisan. They might expand background checks or ban bump stocks, but Republicans are on board with those anyway.

They won’t pass another #AssaultWeaponsBan, for example. If they followed through there, they’d lose that issue as a bargaining chip for the following election. And, folks, that’s *all* they care about - gaining & maintaining money and power. That’s it. They don’t care about us.

That’s also why both parties are okay with leaving the senate rules where they require 60 votes on anything the two parties disagree about. It’s unlikely either party will have that kind of control, so it allows them to shrug and blame the other party for their own failures.

Democrats absolutely *could* have passed #UniversalHealthcare (even #SinglePayer) in 2009-2010. They didn’t because *they* didn’t really want to. They left healthcare badly damaged so that they could continue to use it as a tool to win elections in the future.