The majority then announced, with an opinion from Chief Justice John Roberts, that it was overthrowing the student loan forgiveness program, granting a request from six Republican state attorneys general on behalf of a loan servicer, the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, that did not want to be used as a plaintiff. Without MOHELA, the states did not have standing to bring the suit—they are not directly harmed.

Roberts and the majority weren’t going to be bothered by the fact that their plaintiff was an unwilling participant in this highly partisan scheme. “By law and function, MOHELA is an instrumentality of Missouri … The [debt forgiveness] plan will cut MOHELA’s revenues, impairing its efforts to aid Missouri college students,” Roberts wrote. “This acknowledged harm to MOHELA in the performance of its public function is necessarily a direct injury to Missouri itself.”

Never mind that in oral arguments the state admitted that MOHELA wasn’t aiding Missouri college students because it hadn’t paid into that fund in 15 years, and “said in its own financial documents that it doesn’t plan to make any payments in the future.”

    • HipHoboHarold@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      So rather than going for the party who has a chance of doing anything good, just throw fuel to the fire. Give them the entire government.

      • RestrictedAccount@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        No. Rather than going for the party who has a chance of doing anything good, they are going to vote for a party that will do the exact opposite of something good.

    • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s how Trump got in in 2016. Rust belt states being tired of being constantly lied to by democrats went and got lied to worse by the GOP

    • Spyder@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      @dankapotamus

      @Arotrios

      The time for that line of thinking is in the primaries. It’s a lot of work, but learn what the candidates in the primary stand for and vote as liberal as you can. Voting for anyone other than the Democratic nominee (or in very, very few cases a well-established third party with a high likelihood of winning) might as well be no vote at all.

      The first-past-the-post system we have makes it nearly impossible for a third party to win and basically ensures that whatever party they are closest to also loses.

    • ExecutiveStapler@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Two things:

      1. The Dems don’t take your vote for granted, they just can’t accomplish anything substantial with such historically slim majorities in the legislature. Link has a chart that shows the majorities in the legislature over time, notice than the margins have been massive in the past, such as during the New Deal era, but they’ve been razor thin recently. You can’t pass housing reform, health care reform, college reform, abortion reform, etc. with razor thin margins thanks to our dramatic polarization.

      2. The Dems are not a monolith. Due to our FPTP voting system, we have two coalitions pretending to be parties, with the Dems being a mixture of everything from barely represented democratic socialists to fiscally conservative moderates. Vote in your primary to choose who in that spectrum you want, and in the general realize you can only choose between the party that gives tax cuts to the wealthy and inspires discord in our nation and the party that actually tries. Voting for a third party is just useless, look at link if you’re not convinced.

    • Arotrios@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      @dankapotamus I disagree - while there’s certainly deadlock on the federal level, your vote absolutely matters, especially when it comes to state and local politics. Take a look at the states that have democratic super-majorities. Best example of progress in action is in Minnesota right now.

      That being said, speaking to your larger point, I think that if ranked-choice voting were implemented, we’d have a much more effective democratic process that would allow protest votes that didn’t directly harm your best interests. Sadly, given the state of American politics, if you make under $150k a year or are a member of any minority group, if you don’t vote Democratic, you’re voting against your own interests.

    • mrnotoriousman@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m incredibly liberal but to be honest,

      Literally every time I see this it’s followed by insert right-wing view/talking point

      • NotTheOnlyGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because no one is all-left or all-right, or all-Liberal or all-Conservative. It’s not any form of doublethink to, say, support the right of a business to choose who they do business with - while also believing that we should be closing tax loopholes on businesses and corporations so that they pay a fairer share of the US tax bill. That’s just one example, but others exist. No one I’ve ever met that was sane fully supports every point of the party line they usually side with. You will also see cases where people say, “I’m conservative but to be honest, liberal/left-wing talking point”. It’s how sane people work.