• Bytemeister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    He dithered and only reluctantly did this. And then when he did, he did it in a way that a corrupt SCOTUS could overrule. There were other paths he could have taken, but he chose the least-confrontational approach and ultimately the court negated most of his efforts.

    I’m gonna gut check this, because I remember him trying couple of times to work out student debt relief. Also, what other steps would you have taken to get student debt relief/forgiveness pushed though? The only step I can think of is after the “president is a king” SCOTUS ruling he could have just canceled them and told everyone to fuck off, but using those powers was clearly something that he didn’t morally agree with.

    • goferking (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      He picked the weakest method to start with, added many delays and means testing, then after being told no by Supreme Court just changed to going through the backlog of those who should have already been forgiven and called it him fulfilling his campaign promises.

      Then on top of that allowed gop to force them to restart.

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Exactly. And ultimately, voters don’t want to hear excuses. They don’t expect perfection, but they do expect some results. Republicans, even with limited majorities, always manage to achieve at least some of what they would call progress. Democrats OTOH just fine endless excuses. At some point, you’re either incompetent or admitting to your voters that you were lying to them - promising them something you would never be able to deliver.