Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 14, 2017 -> 10:56 PM) "Party unity my ass," the contingent of Hillary supporters who said they would refuse to support Obama after he won the nomination. I think pelosi is a great leader even if there are often times I disagree with her politics. I've been surprised by Schumer so far, expecting a much bigger step down from Reid. I voted Clinton last November and would do so again if they were holding another election tomorrow. But the base of the party, or at leasta decent portion of it, is or is moving substantially to the left of centrism. The American people as a whole seem to be fed up with the status quo. People by and large continue to struggle economically even if the stock market is surging and some segments of society are doing very well. Doubling down on the 90's and 00's era politics isn't going to appeal to these people. Sanders "independent" label is a gimmick, but he's always been a reliable vote for Democratic policies. He seems to have single handedly given a voice to the people looking to push the Democratic party as a whole leftward on multiple issues. I don't think he'd be a particularly strong president or leader of the party as a whole, but he does represent an important base and ignoring that is no better than the hardcore Bernie people who insist on their own version of purity politics. I agree with every part of your post, which is why the party has made concession after concession to Sanders and his supporters, yet nothing seems to be "enough". It's maddening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 I'd love to know what these concessions were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 02:36 PM) I'd love to know what these concessions were. The anti-free trade/TPP stances and $15 minimum wage seemed to be Clinton changes that were pressed from the Bernie wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 08:48 AM) The anti-free trade/TPP stances and $15 minimum wage seemed to be Clinton changes that were pressed from the Bernie wing. I don't think she ever backed a $15 minimum wage. She also didn't back TPP because it was so unpopular in the whole country, not just with the left. Although there is almost no doubt she would have went through with it if she was president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 08:53 AM) I don't think she ever backed a $15 minimum wage. She also didn't back TPP because it was so unpopular in the whole country, not just with the left. Although there is almost no doubt she would have went through with it if she was president. Yeah, I think she wanted a $12.50 min wage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 09:36 AM) I'd love to know what these concessions were. Yall were so obsessed with your DNC hate you must have missed this And this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 And the entire shift in the platform to A Better Deal spawns from Bernie's economic populism. They're listening to him and giving him a voice even though he's not a member of the party, but it'll never be enough for Berners until they completely capitulate. There's no compromise among the Bernie Wing, which is why the man would be a horribly ineffective President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 (edited) Imagine thinking Bernie Sanders would have been an ineffective President, but thinking Hillary Clinton would have been very effective as she took advice from Henry Kissinger on what middle east country to bomb next. "Bernie Wing" is just the left and for the left, Bernie Sanders is the compromise. I like Bernie Sanders, but he is not my ideal politician. He still holds some s***ty views, he is by no means perfect. He is often criticized from the left on his foreign policy stances. He is so popular with the left in America, because he is literally one of the only people in government who holds any of these views even in the slightest way. Edited September 15, 2017 by GoSox05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettie4sox Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 Bernie doesn't need to register as a D or R, that's the problem with this country now! If he keeps working for the people of this country, that's all the matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 11:07 AM) Imagine thinking Bernie Sanders would have been an ineffective President, but thinking Hillary Clinton would have been very effective as she took advice from Henry Kissinger on what middle east country to bomb next. "Bernie Wing" is just the left and for the left, Bernie Sanders is the compromise. I like Bernie Sanders, but he is not my ideal politician. He still holds some s***ty views, he is by no means perfect. He is often criticized from the left on his foreign policy stances. He is so popular with the left in America, because he is literally one of the only people in government who holds any of these views even in the slightest way. it's really fascinating the parallels between the Bernie left and the alt-right, who also advocate total isolationism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 You know who else liked large, high speed motorways? Troubling links between the US interstate system and Hitler! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 11:42 AM) You know who else liked large, high speed motorways? Troubling links between the US interstate system and Hitler! was the US interstate system implemented by angry misogynistic white guys too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (Reddy @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 10:47 AM) was the US interstate system implemented by angry misogynistic white guys too? Given that it was built in the 1950's I'm going to go with a very solid yes on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 11:48 AM) Given that it was built in the 1950's I'm going to go with a very solid yes on that. That's pretty much what I assumed. So the parallel you made is probably a pretty good one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 That's the go-to example of why ad hominem fallacies are bad, dude. Just because Hitler supported interstate systems doesn't say anything about interstate systems one way or the other. Just because two groups both have a more isolationist bent than the warmongers who love to bomb bomb bomb doesn't say anything beyond that one overlap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 There is also a difference between isolationism and not supporting international trade deals because they will ultimately end up exploiting workers in this country and aboard. If you think the left is isolationist, then you know little about the history of leftist internationalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 11:54 AM) That's the go-to example of why ad hominem fallacies are bad, dude. Just because Hitler supported interstate systems doesn't say anything about interstate systems one way or the other. Just because two groups both have a more isolationist bent than the warmongers who love to bomb bomb bomb doesn't say anything beyond that one overlap. Wait. You're taking this exchange seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 So your "parallels between the Bernie left and the [white supremacist Nazi] alt-right" was just a 'joke' or? because my point was that your comparison was silly and just an attempt to tarnish those to your left with a weak association to modern nazis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 15, 2017 -> 12:24 PM) So your "parallels between the Bernie left and the [white supremacist Nazi] alt-right" was just a 'joke' or? because my point was that your comparison was silly and just an attempt to tarnish those to your left with a weak association to modern nazis. It was hyperbole, but I do think there's some commonality between Bernie and Trump, their tactics, the way they mobilize their base, and the demographics of said base. This is getting us in the weeds, however, and distracting from the larger point that the DNC has made many concessions to Bernie, and the Party has given him positions of leadership. For him to use that as a platform to continually attack the party is a dick move. And if Bernie supporters care about winning in 2020, they'll think long and hard about calling for the nomination of someone who divides the party, as opposed to someone that may not make everyone on either side happy, but who we can rally behind together without having to continually re-litigate the divides created in 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 15, 2017 Author Share Posted September 15, 2017 Whatever parallels there may be, the most distinguishing factors of Trump are his corruption, incredible dishonesty, ignorance, vanity, misogyny, bigotry and racism are what defines him. If the parallel is "good at slogans they can't can't carry to the finish line" there are actual good examples of parallels you can find. But, yes, this screams "You know who else provided government health programs to their people?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 The main thing I keep seeing in polling is that a big chunk of the country, usually around 60%, don't think the Democrats really stand for anything (or they can't name what they stand for). Forgettable things like "A Better Deal" that quickly get mired in a bunch of technical details with no easily digestable top-line slogans won't change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 15, 2017 Author Share Posted September 15, 2017 And to be honest, I think that's the change. Some of this may be an actual switch to leftist positions, but another part of it is also a shift from the technocratic solutions delivered since the 1990s. Solving complex problems with deploying hundreds of mechanisms all to put market pressure on a not-true market to deliver healthcare instead of just either delivering healthcare yourself aligned to the goals or delivering the insurance yourself is the shift. Medicare is cheaper, relatively, and people "get" it. The biggest takeaway from the ACA is that the medicaid expansion was the most popular part. It also, at one time of the process, was the only part people thought could get passed. But, I think this will be applied to certain cases. And I think the left is going to be surprised at how often people will prefer non-government solutions. But in those cases, I'm sure they will just blame and fight the liberal wing and a fascist regime will take over. History as ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 We've got $700B to dump into the military, but we could never possibly have universal healthcare or free public college education Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 18, 2017 -> 10:07 PM) We've got $700B to dump into the military, but we could never possibly have universal healthcare or free public college education I'm waiting for all "How are we going to pay for this?" think pieces on this. Senate backs bill to pump $700 billion into military The bill allots $10.6 billion for 94 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, which is two dozen more than Trump requested. The bill also provides $25 billion to pay for 13 ships, which is $5 billion and five ships more than the Trump sought. Lmao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 This was a very good scocca piece. https://medium.com/@tscocca/the-new-york-ti...on-a192c232a4c9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts