Jump to content

Alexandria, The New Direction Of The Democrats


Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, TPS said:

She comes from the Bernie wing. Had it been another white male, the DNC would've ignored the win. 

Also, her policies of "democratic socialism" are mostly what the Nordic economies and much of Europe follow, such as universal healthcare. They don't seem to be starving...

 

Scandinavia?  Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.theringer.com/tech/2018/7/17/17578524/seattle-amazon-kshama-sawant-socialist-local-politics

 

 Many politicians, especially local ones, communicate in facts and figures, but Sawant speaks in ideas. She’s less a legislator arguing for a specific agenda than a polemicist mapping out a new world order—“We need international solidarity among working people”—and actively seeking recruits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Joe Miner said:

 

Wow, if that woman's not a threat to our way of life, then I don't know who is.

 

Marxism? Yikes.

 

Edited by joesixpack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I meant the Democratic party as I was referring to Obama's comment about possibly embracing UBI in the future.  Nothing to do with you.  It may be a stupid poll, but all it takes are some stupid politicians to embrace that poll and run on it.  If this party continues to pursue the Bernie Sanders path to the radical left, then I'll pry just stay home on election day.

 

Who was Obama addressing from South Africa?  South Africans?  Americans but speaking from South Africa?  The entire Globe?  Was this his way of starting a campaign to be ruler of the world? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I had a conversation the other day with a very smart political operator who work(ed/s) as a contractor for various alphabet agencies....

 

 

Interesting conversation. At a high level it makes sense...burn it down and start fresh. I thought the Republicans would have reached this tipping point long before the Democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Kevbeau said:

Interesting conversation. At a high level it makes sense...burn it down and start fresh. I thought the Republicans would have reached this tipping point long before the Democrats.

 

lots of bad and totally wrong predictions have been consistently made since November 2016

 

hasn't caused people to reflect on what they really know

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, keepthefaith said:

 

Who was Obama addressing from South Africa?  South Africans?  Americans but speaking from South Africa?  The entire Globe?  Was this his way of starting a campaign to be ruler of the world? 

 

I was wondering the same thing, is he now a Global organizer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Kevbeau said:

Interesting conversation. At a high level it makes sense...burn it down and start fresh. I thought the Republicans would have reached this tipping point long before the Democrats.

 

How about both parties start running governments on the math of government?  That is be responsible with tax revenue, protect citizens, enforce laws and get out of the business of everything else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Kevbeau said:

Interesting conversation. At a high level it makes sense...burn it down and start fresh. I thought the Republicans would have reached this tipping point long before the Democrats.

 

I think you can make the argument the Republicans did, it was just done prior to/during the election. Trump decimated the party establishment during the primaries, the party itself is every bit as fractured as the DNC, but because Trump is the head of the party (and he's not a traditional republican), a lot of the clean up is being done more in the shadows. In that conversation, for example, the assumption was as the head of the party Trump would have the same conversation with his side as he did with the Dems wherein he showed whatever evidence he had and made the deal: "get out or get prosecuted". 

 

Of the now almost 50 congressmen who have decided to resign or not run again, the majority are from the GOP. 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I saw that.  How they didn't recognize that disguise is beyond me, but I'm guessing they don't watch a lot of TV.

 

because busy people don't have time to try to weedle out the little games someone is smirkingly playing on them?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, njbuff said:

Is "Crazy Eyes" the best the Democratic Party can come up with in the year 2018?

 

If that's the case............... the Republicans are a shoe in for the mid terms.

 

you never know...

 

usually the President loses ground in a first midterm, sometimes cratering.

 

Trump picking up strength would be another double-bird in the face of the geniuses who want to tell us all how to live and think

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, njbuff said:

Is "Crazy Eyes" the best the Democratic Party can come up with in the year 2018?

 

If that's the case............... the Republicans are a shoe in for the mid terms.

 

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

 

you never know...

 

usually the President loses ground in a first midterm, sometimes cratering.

 

Trump picking up strength would be another double-bird in the face of the geniuses who want to tell us all how to live and think

 

 

 

 

The Democrats will gain seats in 2018.  It won't be a "Blue Wave" but will still be portrayed as such in the media

Whether the Democrats gain enough for a House majority is still up in the air.  

The Senate is unlikely to flip given this years map strongly favors Republican incumbents while putting Trump state Democrats on defense

 

Whoever controls the House in 2019 will lose the White House in 2020

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GG said:

 

Scandinavia?  Really?

In the richest country in the world, the so-called "socialists" are people who push policies in support of the poor and working class. In the current system, the wealthiest have used their influence to push policies in support of their interests.

 

Universal healthcare, cheap tuition, childcare, job guarantee, etc. are not radical ideas, and they are no less doable economically than endless ME conflicts, 800 overseas military bases, the F-35, and on and on....

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The term Democratic Socialist has kind of been co-opted and used to describe a social democrat or populist left candidate (for better or worse that is due to Bernie Sanders.) Which must be super frustrating for the actual Democratic socialists who actually believe in a form of post-capitalist society. I honestly think that if the Democrats went more populist left pushing for things like Universal Healthcare, Increased Infrastructure spending, ending rampant military spending, criminal justice reform, legalization of Marijuana, Green energy and job training you would actually see the Dems win more elections. But instead, the same special interests that kept the Tea Party people out will do there best to squash any outsider interference. 

15 minutes ago, TPS said:

In the richest country in the world, the so-called "socialists" are people who push policies in support of the poor and working class. In the current system, the wealthiest have used their influence to push policies in support of their interests.

 

Universal healthcare, cheap tuition, childcare, job guarantee, etc. are not radical ideas, and they are no less doable economically than endless ME conflicts, 800 overseas military bases, the F-35, and on and on....

 

The jobs guarantee is virtually impossible current economic conditions and would be economically disastrous. Other than that and maybe 1-2 other policy platforms I don't see anything radical about the populist left agenda. Universal Healthcare, in particular, is always pushed as this unreasonable radical thing when in reality the US healthcare system is the one that is actually radically inefficient and wasteful. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, LABillzFan said:

 

First of all, half of America doesn't pay taxes, so to ask them if they want free money and to make other companies pay for it is like asking your child if they want ice cream for breakfast.  It's a stupid poll.

 

Do you want free money? Do you want companies to be taxed higher to give you this money?

 

How big of a magoo do you have to be to NOT predict the outcome of something so embarrassingly stupid?

 

Second of all, what's my party?

 

The talking point of "Half of America doesn't pay taxes" has been disproven so many times. The working poor pay social security, Medicare, Medicaid, Payroll taxes, State and Local income taxes, sales taxes, fees and various other taxes. So to portray anyone advocating for the outrageous notion that Universal Healthcare is a good idea is some freeloader who just wants a handout is not only dishonest but intellectually lazy. 

 

I think it is insane to look at the people with the least economic power (The poor) and think they are the ones responsible for everything wrong with the economy. On the surface level whose decisions are going to impact the economy more a billionaire or a poor person? 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

because busy people don't have time to try to weedle out the little games someone is smirkingly playing on them?

 

 

So they are too busy to understand the words coming out of their own mouths? Interestingly, Bernie Sanders fell for it too, but because he is an inherently smart and honest man, he wasn't too tired or distracted to understand what Cohen was trying to get him to say. 

Edited by Buftex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...