2018 Democrats thread

[caulfield12]

So you're on the side of Lamb and Trump on the tariffs...?

 

That's an interesting one that splits the DNC/Corporate/Moderate-Aligned/Rubin-Clinton-Obama/Goldman Sachs "centrists" of the party against the progressive leftist wing.

 

The trick for Dems on the national level is appealing to BOTH sides of the party...which probably makes NEITHER side happy, right?

[Dam8610]

So you're on the side of Lamb and Trump on the tariffs...?

 

That's an interesting one that splits the DNC/Corporate/Moderate-Aligned/Rubin-Clinton-Obama/Goldman Sachs "centrists" of the party against the progressive leftist wing.

 

The trick for Dems on the national level is appealing to BOTH sides of the party...which probably makes NEITHER side happy, right?

 

I don't necessarily think tariffs and trade wars are a good idea, but I definitely think the unions and the strengthening of them and their rights to collectively bargain are good things and weakening of those things and siding with corporate interests against workers is bad. That was one of the pillars of Conor Lamb's campaign.

[caulfield12]

I don't necessarily think tariffs and trade wars are a good idea, but I definitely think the unions and the strengthening of them and their rights to collectively bargain are good things and weakening of those things and siding with corporate interests against workers is bad. That was one of the pillars of Conor Lamb's campaign.

 

And it pretty much had to be to win in that particular district...

[Reddy]

Let’s put it this way.

 

The Dems (progressives in particular) have to be open to the Conor Lamb?€™s and Doug Joneses of the world to take back the House.

 

No litmus tests. Let?€™s not forget Sanders/Our Revolution has supported a few pro-life and gun rights candidates as well in conservative districts. The gun issue is evolving daily, though.

 

On a national basis, there has to be some compromise in 2020. You can?€™t have Kaine as a VP, and you shouldn?€™t have Sanders/Warren either if you?€™re completely serious about winning, no matter how stacked the deck looks against the GOP on a national basis at the current moment.

 

The Dems also have to make a decision where they are on trade...and it’s not an easy one, as Hillary’s waffling demonstrated.

 

 

https://medium.com/s/jeremiad/the-unfortuna...il-bd1063814dc0

This article is a bit philosophical...but the two choices for the country (and world) are not so obvious moving forward

 

Agreed on all counts.

[Reddy]

"Big tent theory" leads to "majorities" that don't mean anything, so instead of saying "no litmus tests", you should say "all I care about is being able to say 'Democrats hold a majority of elected offices'", because the blue dogs (like Lipinski) are DINOs who are more likely to vote with the Republicans on any major issue, so a "big tent" Democratic "majority" effectively becomes a Republican majority with different names in key positions. It's certainly important to vote for Lipinski over the actual Nazi he's running against, but it was equally important, if not moreso, that his primary challenger Marie Newman should've beat him, so that that vote actually caucused with the Democrats on key issues.

 

Also, Conor Lamb is a progressive as far as I can tell. At least he is on the important (economic) issues. I've heard criticisms of him being "pro-life" as well, but his stance on the issue is that while that is his personal belief, he recognizes the importance of legal abortion and will defend that right as a congressman. All I ask for is to vote correctly. I'd even take a Republican who votes correctly for the wrong reasons.

 

Your thoughts on folks like Jones, Manchin, Tester, etc?

 

(not ignoring our other convo, just on the phone and can't write lengthy responses)

 

[caulfield12]

Your thoughts on folks like Jones, Manchin, Tester, etc?

 

(not ignoring our other convo, just on the phone and can't write lengthy responses)

 

Heitkamp and McCaskill are also part of this convo...McCaskill should have an advantage now with the Greitens (gov) fiasco

Joe Donnelly (IND), for sure.

 

Michael Bennet/Mark Warner/Tim Kaine/Gary Peters/Chris Coons/Tom Carper

[Reddy]

Heitkamp and McCaskill are also part of this convo...McCaskill should have an advantage now with the Greitens (gov) fiasco

Joe Donnelly (IND), for sure.

 

Michael Bennet/Mark Warner/Tim Kaine/Gary Peters/Chris Coons/Tom Carper

 

You have this habit of responding as if I was asking the question of you and not someone else. I'm curious where Dam stands on Dems like these, because I wonder how he squares it with his Bernieism.

 

[GoSox05]

I get Doug Jones in Alabama or Joe Manchin in West Virginia. You are lucky to have anything in those states and if those senators vote with you on even one thing, than it's a plus.

 

I don't get Dianie Feinstein in California.

Edited April 16, 2018 by GoSox05

[Dam8610]

Your thoughts on folks like Jones, Manchin, Tester, etc?

 

(not ignoring our other convo, just on the phone and can't write lengthy responses)

 

Manchin might as well be a Republican, he votes with them on every key issue. I didn't like that (I'm assuming Doug) Jones doesn't understand how taxes fund societies (see: wanted to lower corporate rate and would likely support repatriation tax holidays, which have proven to not work as the politicians intend), and I'd like to see what the hell his being an "economic populist" means to how he'll vote. Tester seems to have agreeable ideas on most economic issues, except banks.

[StrangeSox]

Manchin votes with Dems on more issues than not, and most importantly he'd vote for Dem leadership. Control of committees and what gets brought to the floor is immensely powerful.

 

He is miles better than whatever Republican you'd get out of West Virginia replacing him.

Edited April 17, 2018 by StrangeSox

[caulfield12]

See Blankenship...

[Reddy]

Manchin might as well be a Republican, he votes with them on every key issue.

Except for all the key issues that he's voted with Dems on under the Trump administration of course.

 

Thanks for proving me right about Berners.

 

Would you rather have someone who votes with you 70-80% of the time, or 0% of the time?

[caulfield12]

Except for all the key issues that he's voted with Dems on under the Trump administration of course.

 

Thanks for proving me right about Berners.

 

Would you rather have someone who votes with you 70-80% of the time, or 0% of the time?

 

 

https://heavy.com/news/2017/02/joe-manchin-...t-virginia-bio/

[GoSox05]

Except for all the key issues that he's voted with Dems on under the Trump administration of course.

 

Thanks for proving me right about Berners.

 

Would you rather have someone who votes with you 70-80% of the time, or 0% of the time?

 

 

In West Virginia or other southern states, I'd take someone who voted 70% of the time. In states like New York and California, I want closer to 100%.

 

Also, what is a Berner?

Edited April 17, 2018 by GoSox05

[Reddy]

https://heavy.com/news/2017/02/joe-manchin-...t-virginia-bio/

Ohmygosh this is brand new information! THANK YOU!

 

GMAB, I'll take Joe Manchin 7 days a week and twice on Sunday in West Virginia. What was your point in posting this? Do you not think Manchin is better than the alternative? Or do you just get a kick out of being contrarian?

 

 

[bmags]

Manchin votes with Dems on more issues than not, and most importantly he'd vote for Dem leadership. Control of committees and what gets brought to the floor is immensely powerful.

 

He is miles better than whatever Republican you'd get out of West Virginia replacing him.

 

Yes I would say that Joe Manchin is better than a former coal executive responsible for the deaths of his employees

[Dam8610]

Except for all the key issues that he's voted with Dems on under the Trump administration of course.

 

Thanks for proving me right about Berners.

 

Would you rather have someone who votes with you 70-80% of the time, or 0% of the time?

 

What key issues? Bear in mind, no social or procedural issue qualifies as "key" to me. I assess politicians on their positions on the economy, corporate vs. worker interests, taxes, healthcare, and education. Manchin's policy positions on those issues place him squarely with the Republicans.

 

Also, I'd rather have someone who will vote my way less to have an opportunity to vote them out. Incumbents aren't susceptible enough to primary challengers in this country for the Democrats to function as a party that gets anything done and function the way you want them to. But hey, if you think 70-80% is good enough, we can give you 79% of the air you need. I'm sure you won't miss the oxygen at all.

[Reddy]

What key issues? Bear in mind, no social or procedural issue qualifies as "key" to me. I assess politicians on their positions on the economy, corporate vs. worker interests, taxes, healthcare, and education. Manchin's policy positions on those issues place him squarely with the Republicans.

 

Also, I'd rather have someone who will vote my way less to have an opportunity to vote them out. Incumbents aren't susceptible enough to primary challengers in this country for the Democrats to function as a party that gets anything done and function the way you want them to. But hey, if you think 70-80% is good enough, we can give you 79% of the air you need. I'm sure you won't miss the oxygen at all.

 

Check out Manchin's record this session of Congress, and let me know how he voted on healthcare and tax reform.

 

You're literally saying you'd rather have a far right Senator for at LEAST 6 years (likely longer because of incumbency, like you mentioned) in all of the seats that currently have moderate Dems? So you want to lose on every issue and for the GOP to pass all its wildest dreams? Burn it all down and screw minorities and women because of that 20%? Do you have any idea what the ramifications of that are? Or in terms of the judicial branch? I'm guessing Bernie was the guy who got you into politics?

 

Because that's some grade A ignorant. At least I hope it is. Because if it's not ignorance it's incredible selfishness.

 

[Reddy]

Also, are you a straight white dude? Just wondering because if so, your "no social issues matter to me" statement is....... pretty indicative of the problem with the Bernie wing.

Edited April 18, 2018 by Reddy

[caulfield12]

Uh-oh.

[Dam8610]

Check out Manchin's record this session of Congress, and let me know how he voted on healthcare and tax reform.

 

You're literally saying you'd rather have a far right Senator for at LEAST 6 years (likely longer because of incumbency, like you mentioned) in all of the seats that currently have moderate Dems? So you want to lose on every issue and for the GOP to pass all its wildest dreams? Burn it all down and screw minorities and women because of that 20%? Do you have any idea what the ramifications of that are? Or in terms of the judicial branch? I'm guessing Bernie was the guy who got you into politics?

 

Because that's some grade A ignorant. At least I hope it is. Because if it's not ignorance it's incredible selfishness.

 

If you couldn't get oxygen, would you care about all the nitrogen et al you were getting out of air? Would it be "ignorant" or "incredibly selfish" of you to seek out oxygen by any means necessary?

 

Also, are you a straight white dude? Just wondering because if so, your "no social issues matter to me" statement is....... pretty indicative if the problem with the Bernie wing.

 

Have you ever wondered why every country in Europe has a better quality of life than we do? What do they do differently? The most prominent thing to me is that they protest and fight for economic justice (and get it), whereas we protest and fight for social justice (and don't get it). Einstein once said that insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We've let neoliberals and conservatives run the economy and country for four decades now, and clearly it's not working for anyone but the oligarchs. Also, clearly all the social justice efforts aren't working because society and bureaucracy are as unjust and biased as ever, and are becoming dangerously authoritarian. I'm just a person who looks at the situation and decides to not be insane. We have to try something different, because what is simply isn't working.

[Reddy]

You actually responded to none of my points. You created a straw man instead. Care to actually respond? Or are you sticking to the logical fallacy game?

[Reddy]

whereas we protest and fight for social justice (and don't get it).

 

What's the status of interracial and gay marriage in this country? What's the status of minority and female voting rights? What's the status of abortion rights? What's the status of the strikes for teacher pay in places like OK, WV, AZ, etc?

 

You have a very skewed world-view my friend. Just because we're still fighting for social justice doesn't mean we haven't been winning those battles throughout history - including very recently. To say they don't matter to you is the height of white privilege. You are the prototypical Bernie Bro, and you are why a Bernie candidacy would be disastrous for the Democratic Party in 2020. It would hand Trump or Pence another term easily. But like you said, you'd rather have them in office if it means having a better chance of replacing them with a progressive afterwards, no matter how much damage they do to people who don't have the same privilege you do. Fortunately, you and I get to avoid most of the fallout from a Trump or a Presidency. Aren't we lucky? The difference is, I want to fight to fix that imbalance in the system, and you're fine with it because it doesn't hurt YOU, and you think it'll help you achieve your economic agenda ... at some point.

 

That's pretty messed up, man.

[GoSox05]

What's the status of interracial and gay marriage in this country? What's the status of minority and female voting rights? What's the status of abortion rights? What's the status of the strikes for teacher pay in places like OK, WV, AZ, etc?

 

You have a very skewed world-view my friend. Just because we're still fighting for social justice doesn't mean we haven't been winning those battles throughout history - including very recently. To say they don't matter to you is the height of white privilege. You are the prototypical Bernie Bro, and you are why a Bernie candidacy would be disastrous for the Democratic Party in 2020. It would hand Trump or Pence another term easily. But like you said, you'd rather have them in office if it means having a better chance of replacing them with a progressive afterwards, no matter how much damage they do to people who don't have the same privilege you do. Fortunately, you and I get to avoid most of the fallout from a Trump or a Presidency. Aren't we lucky? The difference is, I want to fight to fix that imbalance in the system, and you're fine with it because it doesn't hurt YOU, and you think it'll help you achieve your economic agenda ... at some point.

 

That's pretty messed up, man.

 

 

Speaking of using stereotypes.

[Reddy]

Speaking of using stereotypes.

Care to respond to any of my points? So far both Bernie supporters have just deflected.