Bush signed the law, but it was carried out by the Obama admin, most specifically Obama-appointed Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner. Despite around four million people being originally estimated as eligible for the program, under Geithner’s administration the program helped less than a million of them, and a third of those it helped ended up re-defaulting on their mortgages anyway because they weren’t helped enough. Geithner was quoted as saying that he viewed the goal of the program not as keeping people in their homes, but as slowing down the foreclosures so that they didn’t overwhelm the banks.

The thread was about black men, so I started the thread by talking about Obama’s effect on black men. I didn’t imply anything except in your mind.

You didn’t even read the second clause of my sentence, which was “doesn’t reverse during Obama’s term,” despite his policies allegedly being intended to do exactly that.

George Washington was the tyrant George Washington feared. Just ask the Revolutionary War veterans who had the audacity to demand payment for their service, the poor rural farmers whose only reliable store of value was excessively taxed, the American Indians he helped massacre or oh yeah his fucking slaves.

he specifically failed black americans.

I said that he failed Black Americans, I did not say “specifically”. You imagined that I said that because it was a way to move the goalposts to invalidate my point without having to engage critically with what I was saying.

Barack Obama does not give a shit about the black community. He does not give a shit about working class Americans. He didn’t even give a shit about his own campaign staff in the end, kicking them to the curb as soon as they had fulfilled their purpose to hang out with celebrities. These aren’t unique traits to Barack Obama, but they are nevertheless an accurate assessment of him.

And it’s also your move to prove that Obamas policies were actually the issue, because similar things happened all over the world, and a government can only do so much.

I would agree that McCain would have failed the American people in the exact same way, but your insistence that “a government can only do so much” is false, because even in just the history of 20th century America we have an example of the government doing far more than it managed to do in 2009, as was pointed out by my earlier source.

Obama’s policies were bad for all Americans, not just Black Americans

not a great counterargument, I gotta say,

Obama didn’t get to determine the state of the economy when he took over, but he had the largest mandate of any modern president and his economic recovery plan failed to deliver for anyone except bank owners.

New Report Looks at How Obama’s Housing Policies Destroyed Black Wealth

“What it shows is we bailed out Wall Street — that wasn’t entirely Obama’s doing at all, that was Bush and the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, and so forth — but housing was almost entirely under his control. Homeowners were not bailed out,” Ryan Cooper, one of the report’s authors, told The Intercept about the findings of the report.

The authors singled out the Home Affordable Modification Program for censure for seeking to incentivize mortgage services to modify loans.

The failures of HAMP are well-documented — it ended up helping big banks and doing very little for homeowners.

The authors suggest that the New Deal’s Home Owners’ Loan Corporation is a model that may have yielded different outcomes. HOLC purchased mortgages directly and refinanced them, but such a model of direct government intervention and control of an economic problem has been anathema to modern government officials.

What’s wild is that an HOLC-type solution as the auuthors suggest also would have bailed out the banks. It just would have done so in a way that saved homeowners too. Obama specifically pursued a policy that bailed out the banks without saving the homeowners.

And his response to that recession was to give money to banks and ask them politely not to foreclose on people. We see how well that worked.

Observe the slow, uninterrupted decline that starts in 2004, doesn’t reverse during Obama’s term, and in fact doesn’t see any positive movement until late in Trump’s term, when COVID relief was being handed out.

My points were that a) lemmy.ml’s opinion was irrelevant to the Biden camp, and b) that then expecting them to fall in line for the Harris camp is wrong.

Your reply is a total non-sequitur.

Not surprising. Obama presided over the largest drop in home ownership among Black Americans in our country’s history, so why would we expect him to give a shit about the Black community now?

You Lemmy.ml people asked Biden to step down because he’s old

Has your goldfish memory already dumped the dozens of opinion pieces by Democrat media personalities that called for him to drop out too? Biden has never shown any interest in doing what the lemmy.ml community wants him to do.

In any event it is not any American’s responsibility to fall in line for Harris, it is Harris and her campaign’s responsibility to make her appealing to Americans. And ever since her blood and soil DNC speech, she has seemingly done everything in her power to make herself as unpalatable as possible.

See my other comment. The idea that the Reps have captured the poor in the US just isn’t founded in anything real - polling shows that Democrats lead across all income levels but they still really lead among poor voters. The Reps’ electoral presence is almost all down to gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement.

Look at the response Chappell Roan got. Even though she said she was gonna vote for Kamala, the fact that she had criticism got her fukken canceled by the blue maga crowd.

I saw some stats on this in another thread, most third party voters wouldn’t be voting if their candidate wasn’t on the ballot, and most third party voters benefit Democrats down ballot. The spoiler candidate logic has always been sketchy.

Here’s some funny stats

Lower-income voters 58% Democrats 36% Republican

Upper-income voters 53% Democrats 46% Republican

Source: Pew Research, 2024

So maybe the mean is higher for Dems, considering they lead in both categories, but for my money this data draws two things into focus: that lower income voters still prefer Dems to Reps, and that the only reason the Reps are electorally relevant is gerrymandering.

Some of them, but the Republicans still average higher income than Democrats.

The much bigger issue is that voters in general skew higher income than the general population, because working class voters are almost entirely disenfranchised.

SteamVR and ALVR are the only ones that I’ve gotten to work, no dice on standalone DCS though which was the whole reason I bought the damn headset a couple years ago

Yeah. The article explains whether the IANA rules come from, but this kind of thing happens so rarely that frankly it should be handled on a case by case basis, and in this case the .io domain should just be straight up reassigned to the people that it should always have been assigned to.

I assume he microdosed it because he read that it could increase productivity.