1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

The Future Of The Democratic Party.

Discussion in 'off topic' started by maxflinn, Dec 25, 2017.

  1. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    it's the fact that, like obama, she says she supports all sorts of progressive things, but i don't believe that any of it is sincere in terms of her actually taking forceful action if president. she's also been very inconsistent and chooses words cunningly to avoid getting "caught".
     
  2. chainrule

    chainrule gordon

    Obama got the ACA passed, then lost the House, and subsequently the Senate. If he were more forcefully progressive, I’m sure the losses would have been greater. That’s the the state of politics in the US.
     
  3. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    yeah, a republican policy.
     
  4. Marky-Mark

    Marky-Mark pfm Member

    It's all in the record and all of it is online. There's nothing terrible in that record, but it doesn't have a bonafide progressive flavor either. And she's even more carefully managed, parsed and guarded now.

    Progressives know the label she wears is a facade, and so the only dem faction buying into it are the loyal Team Democrat mainstreamers ... the same group who would gladly pull the lever for a Biden.

    I mean you've got a guy upstream posting 'justice' three times in the same list that includes 'healthcare for all' and 'combating climate change' while she dumped out of a climate debate before jumping back in, throwing Sanders and Medicare for all under the bus she once rode in, and all while the pinned justice tag is laughably debunked after 10 minutes with her record as a prosecutor.

    Candidates like Harris are why the democratic party is a failure to anyone beyond brand loyalists and Twitter addicts.
     
  5. John

    John TDS free

    ACA a republican policy? You’ve got to be kidding.
     
  6. Hook

    Hook Blackbeard's former bo'sun.

    The ACA was based on what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts.

    Republicans only began hating it after it was passed nationally as "Obamacare".
     
  7. John

    John TDS free

    Back in 2009 and 2010, Democrats controlled the White House and the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rammed Obamacare through without a single Republican vote.

    The Washington Post said of the Obamacare fight at the time “It has inflamed the partisanship that Obama pledged to tame when he campaigned for the White House and has limited Congress’s ability to pass any other major legislation.”

    In December 2009, the U.S. Senate voted 60 to 39 for Obamacare. The Washington Post reported “The Senate bill passed without a single GOP vote.”

    In March 2010, the U.S. House voted 219 to 212 for Obamacare. 34 House Democrats and all of the House Republicans voted against Obamacare. The NO votes were the only bipartisan votes.


    President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) on March 23, 2010.
     
  8. Hook

    Hook Blackbeard's former bo'sun.

    I understand the history, and was simply pointing out the basis for vuk's comment.
     
  9. Marky-Mark

    Marky-Mark pfm Member

    The only way I'm aware of that a single person in the USA can have 100% free healthcare via the ACA is expanded Medicaid, and that's if they have less than 17k USD a year in total income. And it's not available in many Red states because the states opted out.
     
  10. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    not only is it romney's plan, but it was originally conceived of by the heritage foundation:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapo...invented-the-individual-mandate/#1d17bee26187

    had mccain or romney made it national instead of obama, republicans would be defending it like guns.
     
  11. Marky-Mark

    Marky-Mark pfm Member

    At the rate the uber progressive prosecutor is shooting herself in the feet (single digit approval), she's about to become a bit player in the DNC $hitshow unless she quickly puts together a cartload of Hopium for the climate debate she cancelled for fundraising but has decided now to attend.
     
  12. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    @Marky-Mark

    she is NOT a progressive and the progressive "base" does not like her at all.
     
  13. Marky-Mark

    Marky-Mark pfm Member

    I know that, but you'd be surprised how many mainstream democrats refer to her as a progressive, probably from her cheat sheet.

    I'd say also that courting progressives was why she glommed onto Medicare for All before she ditched it for insurance companies.
     
  14. Marky-Mark

    Marky-Mark pfm Member

  15. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    @Marky-Mark

    as i sad before, she is probably a sociopath or just really comfortable with big lies for other personality reasons. i am hoping she and biden are done before the end of the year. without the massive bias and free promotion form MSNBC and the rest, they would be done already.
     
  16. maxflinn

    maxflinn Bernie Sanders 2020.

    Bernie Sanders criticising the military industrial complex and military spending, demanding that some of the insane 'defence' budget be put to use to help the American people instead, in 1992!


     
    gavreid likes this.
  17. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    @maxflinn

    i don't think he would be prepared to say anything that risky during the current campaign, but it sure needs saying. the USA is mostly in a state of nation-centric delusion (that is pretty much identical to the psychology of racism) leading people to believe they are so much better than the rest of the world that extreme authoritarian measures like spending half your money on the military are necessary to protect against being raped by unwashed foreigners -- whatever symbolic form of that works for you (it even worked for elizabeth warren when she voted for the recent budget increase under trump).

    in the truest spirit of imperialism, it actually goes well beyond. here is a diagram illustrating military bases around the world:

    [​IMG]

    source: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/us-military-bases-around-the-world-119321

    Despite recently closing hundreds of bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States still maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad—from giant “Little Americas” to small radar facilities. Britain, France and Russia, by contrast, have about 30 foreign bases combined.



    are we allowed to classify this as some type of imperialism? is normalizing trump worse than normalizing 800 military bases?
     
    gavreid and maxflinn like this.
  18. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    funny how appalled people are by every little silly thing trump does, but the above is not worth get worked up about or commenting on.
     
  19. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Waiting for the streetcar..

    I suppose it depends on how concerned you are about who is the dominant global military power. I'd rather it was a close ally than another state.
     
  20. vuk

    vuk \o/ choose anarchy

    it also depends if you are concerned about having a global/imperial military power in the first place.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice