Bill Scher: Why Memory-Hole the Biden-Harris Successes?

Not very convincing, IMO, but, then, we disagree (to some extent) about what successes are.

   And if I'm understanding correctly, part of his argument is: Trump rammed through policies, but Biden didn't...except when he did, and those were ok because they were good policies (unlike Trump's, of course):

Trump has eschewed bipartisanship, ramming through his unpopular Medicaid cuts to pay for more tax cuts for the wealthy through the partisan budget reconciliation process, blowing up a bipartisan deal to fund the government through September by clawing back money for foreign aid and public broadcasting on a party-line vote, and breaking the trust needed to readily pass spending bills to keep government open in the next fiscal year. Under the Biden-Harris administration, we had no government shutdowns. Biden signed a slew of bipartisan legislation into law, including major bills regarding infrastructure investment, semiconductor manufacturing, gun safety red flag laws, and postal service reform. When Democrats used budget reconciliation to pass legislation without Republicans, it wasn’t to deny people health care but to make health coverage and renewable energy more affordable.

Were those good laws/policies? Honestly, I don't know. I don't remember (or never knew) the relevant details about most of them. Infrastructure investment is always supposed to be good--not that I really know. Semiconductor investment: seems very good to me, especially given Taiwan's precarious position. Red flag laws: I don't know. I think we should be very skeptical of additional restrictions on firearm ownership, and some of the devil is in the details...which, again, I don't remember. But I don't reject red flag laws out of hand. (Though I think that the last decade should make us even more skeptical about additional restrictions; the left is willing to cut off your ability to use banks if you cross them politically. Nobody should doubt that they'd take away your guns for similar thoughtcrimes...) More affordable health care and energy would be good...but at least the latter was basically a boondoggle. The former generally involves trade-offs that may or may not be a net improvement.

But I spend way too much time reading about this crap, and I don't really know how much of all that was good. At least these are policy disagreements (if I even do disagree...and, again, I don't even know whether I do) that are within the realm of reason. Sensible people can disagree about all these things, I think. Of course my main objections to the contemporary Dems aren't based on these kinds of disagreements--how could they be when I don't really understand them? My objections are based on outright batshit, far-left, highly philosophical ideas that the Dems have accepted in the last decade or two (or three) that the Dems have adopted on top of or in contravention of these more ordinary center-left ideas--CRT and the thesis of pervasive, invincible racism, gender ideology (and queer theory) and the brainwashing and mutilation of children, de facto open borders, and especially Lysenkoism / political correctness, "anticolonialism" and all the rest. Strip these away--though I'm no longer sure that's possible--and we're back to normal, ordinary, sane disagreements about relatively close-call policy options.