Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ...
8
9
10
  1. #181
    labour in the UK probably won't see power for 10-15 years, similarly the Democratic Party is dead in the water. Thank God conservatism is going to be at the forefront of my adulthood for the remainder of my life. Am happy.

  2. #182
    Quote Originally Posted by Slybak View Post
    The argument that the Democratic Party is, in general, to the right of where it was 10, 20, 30, or 40 years ago is comically nonsensical. The only issue upon which the party is measurably more conservative that prior generations is in its commitment to public education; and even there there are significant divisions within both the party leadership and rank-and-file, and it hasn't been a major issue upon which national or even state-wide electoral contests (neither primary nor general) have hinged. To believe that the Democratic Party has moved to the right requires believing that Robert Byrd was more liberal than Chuck Schumer, or that Nancy Pelosi represents a conservative backlash against the unbridled leftism of Tip O'Neill.

    Clinton in particular has been subjected to this pernicious myth with scant evidence, and when she publicly campaigns on some of the most liberal stances in party history she is, of course, rebuked for "not really meaning it." That the dumb faction of the left insists on playing this idiotic game of "heads I win, tails you lose" is why very few people in the actual party apparatus takes them seriously.
    Clinton was in favor of TPP and NAFTA, and the Iraq war.

    Unforgiveable, each on its own.

    The only way the democratic party will be anything but a weak ass side to the GOP will be if they go back to policies ala FDR, and excise the entire clinton wing of the party. I mean excise, as in throw them all out, all of the lobbyists, all of the corporate interests. They all need to go as a prerequisite of talking about unity.

  3. #183
    I don't really understand the people that think Perez is insufficiently left-wing. If Perez is insufficiently left-wing for your tastes, it says a lot more about your tastes than it does about Perez. By any reasonable reckoning, his bona fides on things like labor, poverty, and race are about as strongly left leaning as anyone.

  4. #184
    Quote Originally Posted by Magicpot View Post
    Clinton was in favor of TPP and NAFTA, and the Iraq war.

    Unforgiveable, each on its own.
    And she came out against all three, but that doesn't count because she didn't really mean it, right?

    The only way the democratic party will be anything but a weak ass side to the GOP will be if they go back to policies ala FDR
    You mean massive spending on white citizens to the purposeful exclusion of non-whites, and using the national security apparatus to target a particular minority group under the rubric that they represent a collective threat to the continued existence of the United States?

    I have bad news for you, because there was a candidate like that who ran in 2016....

  5. #185
    Quote Originally Posted by Kryos View Post
    Democrats learned nothing. Bernie definitely needs to start a new progressive social democratic party and make the DNC suffer the same faith the Whig Party had.
    America is way too far right for an actual left party to do anything. Just look at how they treat centrist third way democrats like Obama and Clinton. The right won't even compromise with the middle ground. The middle ground is supposed to be where compromises happen ffs.

    No way an actual left candidate is going to win a national election. They can win regional elections like in CA, NY, or MA, but they aren't going to win on a national stage.

    Our country is just way crazy right wing to support someone like Bernie.

  6. #186
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonus View Post
    It really depends on what you mean by liberal. Socially, especially when it comes to diversity politices the party is more liberal than ever. Economically, absolutely not - there's no way Clinton would get so much corporate backing if she were actually focused on things like income inequality and educational spending.
    Yeah. The candidate who campaigned on tackling the greatest causes of income inequality - gender pay equity, lack of parental leave and child care, and college debt - never said anything about income inequality. If only she was from the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party, like (former Clinton aid and campaign manager) Bill de Blasio or (former Clinton Labor Secretary and friend from their college days) Robert Reich.

    If you go back to the early 70s, Nixon, who was a republican and theoretically conservative...
    Here it comes... the "Nixon was a liberal" canard.

    proposed a national health plan and negative taxes for poor people, and also raised the minimum wage significantly. He would be considered a fairly far left democrat right now if he supported those policies today.
    Here's the two things you need to know about Nixon and domestic policy. The first is that Nixon didn't care about domestic policy. The second is that liberal Democrats and liberal Republicans held a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. That's how the EPA got passed. That's how EITC got passed (under Ford, not Nixon). That's how the minimum wage was increased. That health plan that Nixon proposed? Not to the liking of the liberal majority, so it failed.

  7. #187
    Quote Originally Posted by Slybak View Post
    And she came out against all three, but that doesn't count because she didn't really mean it, right?


    You mean massive spending on white citizens to the purposeful exclusion of non-whites, and using the national security apparatus to target a particular minority group under the rubric that they represent a collective threat to the continued existence of the United States?

    I have bad news for you, because there was a candidate like that who ran in 2016....
    I mean the economic populism of FDR, not the other stuff.

    But yes, that she came out against all of them means nothing. You support any of these at any point, career over, game over, don't try to go into politics again.

    Nobody who supported any of these can be allowed into office anymore.

  8. #188
    Quote Originally Posted by Magicpot View Post
    I mean the economic populism of FDR, not the other stuff.
    You mean his goal of allowing large industries to write their own rules a la the National Industrial Recovery Act, or his compromise with the base to sign the Wagner Act once NIRA was found to be unconstitutional (and likely wouldn't have been reauthorized anyway)?

    And the "other stuff" was part and parcel of FDR's politics. You can no sooner divorce his unwillingness to buck the bigots in his own party from his "populism" as you could divorce Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs from his rationale for turning Vietnam into a charnel house.

    But yes, that she came out against all of them means nothing. You support any of these at any point, career over, game over, don't try to go into politics again.

    Nobody who supported any of these can be allowed into office anymore.
    "The only way for the Democrats to win a commanding majority of the electorate is to disqualify a majority of the electorate from running for office as a Democrat."

  9. #189
    Quote Originally Posted by hrugner View Post
    Pretty much. DNC chair is a clerical and organizational position. You need someone comfortable with dealing with the DNC bodies in various states, they should be familiar with modern polling trends(which were in disarray during this last election), and someone capable at budget outreach and strategy. The position isn't usually politically charged but the last DNC chair decided to politicize it with some bullshit antics while also failing in several of their duties. So long as they are capable, their personal politics shouldn't matter.
    I don't think that is the case. If Bernie had not backed a candidate, most would not even care.

  10. #190
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonus View Post
    Gender pay equity is absolutely not a driver of the growth in income inequality.
    They are mutually reinforcing, owing to the fact that the gap is most persistent among low-income workers and there are far more low-income fields that have a selection bias toward female employees (which is also driven by the lack of affordable child care and universal parental leave).

    Hillary only came out with her college plan because she was losing ground to Bernie's (far more liberal) plan. It was like a 19 point plan that would somehow make colleges affordable but cost the government almost nothing. It was absurd but mostly designed to say, "See! We have a plan too!" in order to muddy the waters in debates with Sanders.
    "She didn't mean it."

  11. #191
    Quote Originally Posted by Blade Wolf View Post
    So from shit to shit then. Guess they learned nothing from losing to fucking Trump...
    Instead of regurgitating the bullshit you've been fed, why don't you explain how Perez is the bad choice? He's basically the same as Ellison.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    *shrug* Obama supported TPP and he's wildly popular.
    Most people either support TPP or have no idea what it is.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tonus View Post
    We're far right because the left has constantly tried to win by shifting to the middle and lost their message, while the right has stayed more ideologically pure and managed to dominate the debate. The left mostly doesn't even try to focus on income inequality and is left blathering about transgender bathrooms (which is like, the least important issue in the history of the world).
    This is an ignorant screed of lies.

    Hillary had the most left-wing platform ever of any major party in US political history.

    Given the policies on tightening Wall Street regulation, taxing the rich, and debt-free public college, your claim that there wasn't a focus on economic inequality is also a lie.

    Blather on transgender bathrooms? Nope, the only people obsessed with transgender bathrooms are the GOP and Trump, obsessed with taking them away.

  12. #192
    The Unstoppable Force Ghostpanther's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    USA, Ohio
    Posts
    24,112
    He seems like a more moderate Democrat than some of the candidates they had. If they are going to have much of a chance in 2020, they need to get off the radical left agenda. Time will tell how successful he will be.

  13. #193
    Quote Originally Posted by CostinR View Post
    Gates said a lot indeed. Behind closed doors he was highly skeptical of the matter, as were Biden and Tom Donilon.

    Here:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...-room-20111013





    Oh really?

    When I say Red Line I mean drawing it in the first place: That was the idiotic decision that she played a role in.

    Here's politifact:

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-sand-comment/

    If you're talking about enforcing it, then no she didn't do that, but my view is that drawing it in the first place was a very stupid idea. Even worse then not enforcing it...enforcing it would have been a disaster, even bigger then what Obama did.

    Trump using the chance to attack Clinton over the international humiliation the US suffered over not following on that red line? Amusing but another matter.



    I am NOT advocating for US isolationism nor do I believe Trump is an isolationist.

    What did Trump really say on the subject of NATO? He specifically said that if they didn't get their shit together and spend 2% on defense that they should be doing that he'll withdraw US protection for those countries.

    You may take issue with saying that to US allies. I don't. Trump's words on NATO have forced everyone here in Europe to stop screwing around on defense spending and actually do what they're supposed to and for the first time in my life Romania is spending 2% of it's GDP on defense.

    I am EXTREMELY happy with the effect Trump has had on NATO. Because countries screwing around on this issue of military spending has undermined our security against Russia. In particular Germany really needed a thick boot to the head after what they did: Refusing to increase military defense spending when they've got a budget surplus.

    Bernie Sanders is an isolationist. Trump is a diplomatic hawk who isn't afraid to speak his mind, that's precisely the kind of person NATO needs right now. If Trump actually does anything to undermine Europe's security I'll be the first to speak out on that. If he threatens to actually start a stupid war I'll go a crusade against him.

    But so far he's done us a lot of favors: He forced both Russia and Ukraine to stop their shooting war when it flared up and threatened to explode in the largest ground war Europe has seen in decades: I am not Russian fanboy, but I sure as fuck don't want a war of that scale on my door.
    I don't see how the red line is anybody's fault but Obama's. He drew it. Once it was drawn, of course Clinton had to stick up for it, but there isn't any evidence that she contributed to it being drawn in the first place.

  14. #194
    Herald of the Titans Berengil's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Tn, near Memphis
    Posts
    2,967
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    I lived in PA for years. I spent a lot of time in rural PA around areas like Altoona.

    I have a very hard time believing Coal Country would see Sanders as someone they could support. I think this is wishful thinking.
    I dunno, Skroe. I think if Clinton had picked Sanders for VP, she could have concentrated on turning out votes in Democratic strongholds, while Sanders went barnstorming through the Rust Belt and Midwest. His message of "workers first" would I think have a certain appeal there. He's shown an ability and willingness to speak to people with whom he has significant differences. I mean, for God's sake, he gave a speech at Liberty University.

    A Democratic Socialist, who supports full abortion rights went to the beating heart of far right religious lunacy. That's some stones right there.
    " The guilt of an unnecessary war is terrible." --- President John Adams
    " America goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy." --- President John Quincy Adams
    " Our Federal Union! It must be preserved!" --- President Andrew Jackson

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •