The Democrat Thread

[Balta1701]

Seems like the smart thing would be to try to wedge between the candidates and the partiers. Try to appeal to the movement in areas like social issues where they would agree with the Dems at least in part, and then try to illustrate NOT how the TP-endorsed candidates are crazy because they are conservative, but that the are just plain crazy, and not actually defending liberty at all.

Where exactly then is the Tea Party rally in favor of prop 19? This is 100% the most classic libertarian argument that can possibly be made, happening in the state with the largest population. If there is any issue that should provoke a surge of tea party libertarian support, it's right there.

[StrangeSox]

The aspects of the tea party that are led by the Palin/Beck crowd (Tea Party) are the relevant aspects because that's who's getting candidates nominated and who's pushing national discussion on policy.

 

The pushback comes from the Tea Party trying to present itself as some new voting bloc or as something outside of standard far-right Republican policy. Whatever not-just-rebranded-Republicans tea party movement there was after the Democrat victories in 2008 has been completely subsumed by the Tea Party as of about January 2009. The Ron Paul libertarianism streak is barely detectable.

 

So, there may be grassroots tea party movements. There may be people who consider themselves part of the tea party but distance themselves from the Tea Party. But that's not what's at play in the upcoming elections. When the Tea Party is talked about, the national Republican Rebranded version is what is on everyone's minds.

[NorthSideSox72]

Where exactly then is the Tea Party rally in favor of prop 19? This is 100% the most classic libertarian argument that can possibly be made, happening in the state with the largest population. If there is any issue that should provoke a surge of tea party libertarian support, it's right there.

I don't even know what Prop 19 is. And how do you know the rallies for it don't include TEa Partiers?

 

[StrangeSox]

That's an interesting point. While the GOP has chosen to thoroughly co-opt the movement, because the alignment is better... the Dems have decided to mock it. To me, that makes no sense, especially since the more libertarian aspects of the general movement actually fits better witht he Dems than the GOP.

 

Seems like the smart thing would be to try to wedge between the candidates and the partiers. Try to appeal to the movement in areas like social issues where they would agree with the Dems at least in part, and then try to illustrate NOT how the TP-endorsed candidates are crazy because they are conservative, but that the are just plain crazy, and not actually defending liberty at all.

 

The overwhelming bulk of the tea party (lower case) movement seems to be socially conservative, not libertarian or liberal.

[NorthSideSox72]

The aspects of the tea party that are led by the Palin/Beck crowd (Tea Party) are the relevant aspects because that's who's getting candidates nominated and who's pushing national discussion on policy.

 

The pushback comes from the Tea Party trying to present itself as some new voting bloc or as something outside of standard far-right Republican policy. Whatever not-just-rebranded-Republicans tea party movement there was after the Democrat victories in 2008 has been completely subsumed by the Tea Party as of about January 2009. The Ron Paul libertarianism streak is barely detectable.

 

So, there may be grassroots tea party movements. There may be people who consider themselves part of the tea party but distance themselves from the Tea Party. But that's not what's at play in the upcoming elections. When the Tea Party is talked about, the national Republican Rebranded version is what is on everyone's minds.

And part of that is fair, as I said, but part of it is stereotyping. I am saying, try not to label all Tea Partiers (regardless of capitalization) as the same as the candidates and talking heads.

 

Also remember, this is a relatively recent construct. It may just fade into obscurity, or it may mature and become stronger and independent of the GOP and Dems. Can't know for sure yet.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

The overwhelming bulk of the tea party (lower case) movement seems to be socially conservative, not libertarian or liberal.

Your capitalization thing is just confusing now.

 

I think the angry, socially conservative crowd, which we knew in the 90's and 2000's as the Christian Coalition, makes up PART of that crowd. The other major part is the Libertarian crowd.

 

[GoSox05]

I don't see the social libertarian aspect in the tea party. I see the economic side. They have some how managed to merge Liberatism and religion.

[mr_genius]

That's an interesting point. While the GOP has chosen to thoroughly co-opt the movement, because the alignment is better... the Dems have decided to mock it. To me, that makes no sense, especially since the more libertarian aspects of the general movement actually fits better witht he Dems than the GOP.

 

Seems like the smart thing would be to try to wedge between the candidates and the partiers. Try to appeal to the movement in areas like social issues where they would agree with the Dems at least in part, and then try to illustrate NOT how the TP-endorsed candidates are crazy because they are conservative, but that the are just plain crazy, and not actually defending liberty at all.

 

seems like the Dem strategy has been to try and 'take the wind out of the sails' of the tea party. but when i read some of the tea party stuff, it seems some of those 'sails' actually belong on the Democrat ship, rather than the GOP ship. i think sapping 20% of tea party support and transferring to the Democrats would be a very workable goal without compromising the Democrat platform.

[Balta1701]

I don't even know what Prop 19 is. And how do you know the rallies for it don't include TEa Partiers?

Prop 19: Legalizing it in CA.

 

I'm sure a handful of Libertarians do get out and support it, but compared with the intensity that the Tea Party comes out on so many other issues...the rallies in favor of 19 have been weak overall, and as far as I can tell from the Google, the issue has been non-existent at the Anti-Obama Tea Party rallies that have happened in CA.

[lostfan]

Well, I'm sure she's read Das Kapital and some of Marx' other works, I trust her evaluation.

 

Really, it's just the standard socialism/communism/marxism/leninism/maoism/stalinism conflation.

I actually read some Marx in high school and there is some stuff he said that can hardly be defined as "evil" and some of it we even do now. Some of his criticisms of capitalism were pretty hard to argue against - does anyone really think child labor should be allowed or that workers shouldn't be paid a living wage and the owners are the only ones rightfully entitled to the profits of that work? Marx also did his work when there were only a handful of democratic countries in the world and most people would be surprised to know that Marx believed democracy was the only legitimate, justifiable form of government. It was the Communist movement in the 20th century that really f***ed up his image as someone who says some things that should be taken seriously, now nobody bothers to try to tell the difference.

 

Disclaimer: this comment shouldn't be read as me endorsing Communism or full-on Marxism

[GoSox05]

I actually read some Marx in high school and there is some stuff he said that can hardly be defined as "evil" and some of it we even do now. Some of his criticisms of capitalism were pretty hard to argue against - does anyone really think child labor should be allowed or that workers shouldn't be paid a living wage and the owners are the only ones rightfully entitled to the profits of that work? Marx also did his work when there were only a handful of democratic countries in the world and most people would be surprised to know that Marx believed democracy was the only legitimate, justifiable form of government. It was the Communist movement in the 20th century that really f***ed up his image as someone who says some things that should be taken seriously, now nobody bothers to try to tell the difference.

 

Disclaimer: this comment shouldn't be read as me endorsing Communism or full-on Marxism

 

 

I always knew you were a commie.

Edited October 14, 2010 by GoSox05

[NorthSideSox72]

seems like the Dem strategy has been to try and 'take the wind out of the sails' of the tea party. but when i read some of the tea party stuff, it seems some of those 'sails' actually belong on the Democrat ship, rather than the GOP ship. i think sapping 20% of tea party support and transferring to the Democrats would be a very workable goal without compromising the Democrat platform.

I agree.

 

[lostfan]

They're not the tea party movement...but the tea party movement doesn't appear unless they get involved. On issue after issue, the Tea Party gets riled up on classic Republican issues, classic republican talking points, and they show up when a Republican leader or Fox News calls on them to do so.

 

You want another great example? Take a look at the tea party victories. Every single time, what has been the sin that has gotten a politician in trouble with the Tea Party? It wasn't supporting Bush's Massive expansion of Medicare in 2003, it wasn't earmarks, it wasn't anything like that...it has been people who voted with the Democrats too often. It has been being too centrist. The Races in Utah, Deleware, Florida, Alaska, New England, everywhere that there is a "tea party uprising!" candidate, the Tea Party candidate won because the Tea Party didn't want them ever working with Democrats. Mike Castle, Robert Bennett, Danny Tarkanian, Charlie Crist, and on and on. Hell, Lisa Murkowski is in the right-right wing of the Republican Party and she was replaced by a Tea Party candidate on the argument that she worked with the Democrats too often.

Scott Brown kind of just used the Tea Party's wave and then when he actually won the election he did whatever the f*** he wanted to do. And good for him.

[lostfan]

I always knew you were a commie.

Коммунизм это единственный способ.

[StrangeSox]

I actually read some Marx in high school and there is some stuff he said that can hardly be defined as "evil" and some of it we even do now. Some of his criticisms of capitalism were pretty hard to argue against - does anyone really think child labor should be allowed or that workers shouldn't be paid a living wage and the owners are the only ones rightfully entitled to the profits of that work? Marx also did his work when there were only a handful of democratic countries in the world and most people would be surprised to know that Marx believed democracy was the only legitimate, justifiable form of government. It was the Communist movement in the 20th century that really f***ed up his image as someone who says some things that should be taken seriously, now nobody bothers to try to tell the difference.

 

Disclaimer: this comment shouldn't be read as me endorsing Communism or full-on Marxism

 

Marx had some legitimate criticisms of capitalism. It's just that his prescription for the fix was so unworkable/unrealistic.

[StrangeSox]

Scott Brown kind of just used the Tea Party's wave and then when he actually won the election he did whatever the f*** he wanted to do. And good for him.

 

Good example of a non-crazy candidate who got elected on the tea party wave.

 

edit: the tea party has since turned on him, though.

Edited October 14, 2010 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

Your capitalization thing is just confusing now.

 

I think the angry, socially conservative crowd, which we knew in the 90's and 2000's as the Christian Coalition, makes up PART of that crowd. The other major part is the Libertarian crowd.

 

I'll try to find some polls tonight that ask self-identifying tea party supporters their positions on social issues. You may very well be correct.

[lostfan]

Marx had some legitimate criticisms of capitalism. It's just that his prescription for the fix was so unworkable/unrealistic.

Yeah, this is the part I couldn't get down with. But when you look at something like, say, wealth consolidation upwards/shrinking of the middle class, Marx probably already said something about it 150 years ago and he is saying "I told you so" from his grave.

[lostfan]

Good example of a non-crazy candidate who got elected on the tea party wave.

 

edit: the tea party has since turned on him, though.

Yeah and I bet you he doesn't care, either. He doesn't need them at this point.

[StrangeSox]

Yeah, this is the part I couldn't get down with. But when you look at something like, say, wealth consolidation upwards/shrinking of the middle class, Marx probably already said something about it 150 years ago and he is saying "I told you so" from his grave.

 

Stagnant real wages for most citizens for over a decade while the top tier saw their wealth sky-rocket. That's a big issue he was against, and you'd think most Americans would be too, but he's treated as equivalent to Hitler. Thanks a lot, Stalin, for making any criticism of capitalism equivalent to supporting mass murder.

 

I didn't bother to verify, but I read recently that Marx himself had to bum money off of his friend regularly.

[GoSox05]

Marx was just a philosopher. He never started any communist revolutions himself. He had been dead for over 30 years before the Russian Revolution.

[lostfan]

Marx was just a philosopher. He never started any communist revolutions himself. He had been dead for over 30 years before the Russian Revolution.

Yeah that's what I was saying. There was no such thing as Communism when Marx was alive. Now as far as anyone seems to know they are the same thing. If Soviet communism = Marxism then even Marx wasn't a "Marxist."

[StrangeSox]

Capitalism has saved the Chilean miners' lives!

 

Conversly, does this mean capitalism killed the West Virginia miners?

 

edit: saw this in a comment, had to include

 

To capitalism: the cause of, and solution to, all life's problems!

Edited October 14, 2010 by StrangeSox

[lostfan]

Capitalism has saved the Chilean miners' lives!

 

Conversly, does this mean capitalism killed the West Virginia miners?

 

edit: saw this in a comment, had to include

 

To capitalism: the cause of, and solution to, all life's problems!

By this logic, capitalism is directly responsible for the workers that died in the explosion of the BP oil rig because it wouldn't have happened if BP hadn't been driven by profit. Why even bring something like that up? That's just plain old kool-aid drinking.

[lostfan]

In order to believe the following (after Obama ditched his horses*** idea to bill veterans' private insurance for injuries sustained in combat that he ditched almost as soon as it was thought of) you'd have to have literally never heard Obama speak on any topic related to the military, ever, and only gotten your information from Sean Hannity or somebody.

"Look, it's an all volunteer force," Obama complained. "Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It doesn't compute.." "I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their country, "Obama continued "I wasn't asking for blood, just money. With the country facing the worst financial crisis in its history, I'd have thought that the patriotic thing to do would be to try to help reduce the nation's deficit.. I guess I underestimated the selfishness of some of my fellow Americans."

It's pretty obviously satire and people forward it in e-mail and say/believe it's an actual quote. Fail.