Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC P - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
The question is: Is that fair to the people? And if we agree not, and if CU stands, is there anything we can do to make the voting landscape more fair without establishing a dangerous precedent?

It seems to me that you're happy without any regulation. Is that right?

Corporations still have armies of lobbyists at the ear of politicians and they write bills for Congress.

Corporations still have the Fox News and Breitbarts that can spread misinformation for their causes like wildfire. It's a tangled web far bigger than CU.
 
Corporations still have armies of lobbyists at the ear of politicians and they write bills for Congress.

Corporations still have the Fox News and Breitbarts that can spread misinformation for their causes like wildfire. It's a tangled web far bigger than CU.

Sure. But when has having other problems ever been a good reason for choosing not to try solving one of them?
 
Sure. But when has having other problems ever been a good reason for choosing not to try solving one of them?

Didn't say do nothing.

I said the problem is money in politics. Of which there are many paths to cause it. You would need a law that addresses the problem from all angles.
 
Last edited:
Didn't say do nothing.

I said the problem is money in politics. Of which there are many paths to cause it. You would need a law that addresses the problem from all angles.

Or different laws for each angle. Either way, I agree with you.
 
Although money in politics is a huge problem (basically bribery is legal in America), the biggest change in the 2016 election and the biggest problem going forward are voter suppression laws. Because of them, American elections are no longer free or fair, and America cannot be considered a democracy.
 
Yes, I understand those points don't matter since the Court has ruled and that cannot be changed short of a new amendment which isn't going to happen.

Well if Hillary had become president and gotten the chance to pick the successor of Scalia there would have soon been an attempt to reverse and pretty much any selected-by-a-Democrat justice would vote to reverse. But yeah, amendment is the only alternative short of both a Democrat winning the presidency and there being a new absent conservative justice.
 
The party needs someone combative and without the baggage that Republicans can mine for opposition research. Moulton comes off as too milquetoast.

We need more blue dog Democrats, period. They are a bit more likely to win over independent and a few Trump voters because "they're not liberal." I would say that the party should accept pro-life candidates, provided they don't make it a driving factor in their campaigns.
 
The state party operations have got to start recruiting from those that are energized for sure. I kinda wish the Dems would make a concerted effort to bring a lot more former military people.
 
The state party operations have got to start recruiting from those that are energized for sure. I kinda wish the Dems would make a concerted effort to bring a lot more former military people.

All the formal military people I've met all are Republicans now, like the military changes the thinking somehow. :(
 
All the formal military people I've met all are Republicans now, like the military changes the thinking somehow. :(

There are for sure a lot of military folk who are registered R's but that's why it's all the more important to seek out Dems that have served.
 
The party needs someone combative and without the baggage that Republicans can mine for opposition research. Moulton comes off as too milquetoast.

We need more blue dog Democrats, period. They are a bit more likely to win over independent and a few Trump voters because "they're not liberal." I would say that the party should accept pro-life candidates, provided they don't make it a driving factor in their campaigns.

so how does a "pro-life" Democrat work within the party, pragmatically? Circa the 1970s or 1980s, I could see it working. But nowadays, abortion-providing clinics are not as prolific as the hardline pro-life officials/lobbyists would have people believe, and state legislators/GOP governors routinely pass increasingly ultra-stringent restrictions/complications regarding seeking abortion services. The hardline wing has pushed policy on this over a cliff-- I don't see how a pro-life Democrat makes any headway promoting the same type of legislation while ostensibly having more "moderate" social policy views on, say, SNAP benefits and other health/human services.

This is the core "conundrum" that those who are rigidly into "centrist" outreach stumble into-- the right's steady march into hard-right conservatism on each and every issue is already over the edge/catastrophically toxic. Those who seek to say, "well, they're kind of right, they have a point, they're just a little too zealous for XYZ" are missing the point that vulnerable populations are still at risk by the vaguest walking-back of the longstanding neo-con Reagan/Bush I/Bush II era. I don't get anything positive from hawkish foreign policy Democrats. They can do what they want, and they're probably the, ahem, "best" candidates for winning over Trumpland folks, but they're going to have to have a lot more going on for them besides that to gain my genuine interest.
 
Last edited:
so how does a "pro-life" Democrat work within the party, pragmatically? Circa the 1970s or 1980s, I could see it working. But nowadays, abortion-providing clinics are not as prolific as the hardline pro-life officials/lobbyists would have people believe, and state legislators/GOP governors routinely pass increasingly ultra-stringent restrictions/complications regarding seeking abortion services.

I was thinking more along the lines of Tim Kaine or Joe Biden, both devout Catholics but support women's right to choose.

I should've phrased it better.
 
A pro-lifer works by separating his beliefs and actions. You can have personal opinion on abortion without voting for it.

For example, the previous lib-dem leader in the UK was a catholic who didn't believe in gay marriage. But voted for it anyways because that was the will of the British people.
 
Last edited:
A pro-lifer works by separating his beliefs and actions. You can have personal opinion on abortion without voting for it.

For example, the previous lib-dem leader in the UK was a catholic who didn't believe in gay marriage. But voted for it anyways because that was the will of the British people.

Though most pro-lifers consider abortion to be tantamount to infanticide.
 
As I have said before, nothing the Democrats can do will help. You can't win elections without voters, and the Republicans have successfully taken enough voters from them:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics...ialflow&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

There is no future. There is no hope. The Democratic Party, as pathetic as it is, is the only block against conservative authoritarianism and it is effectively blocked from competing. Do not fool yourselves. There will be 8 years of Trump, then 8 years of Pence or maybe someone even worse. If you are to the left politically, you have to understand this: we will never win, things will never get any better and there is nothing to hope for or to live for. It's over.
 
We heard that during the Bush era when turdblossom promised a permanent Republican majority for the foreseeable future. And when Obama was elected the line was that shifting demographics was going to ensure Democratic hegemony sooner than later... So maybe the lesson is that American politics is not so easily predicted rather than the apocalyptic vision of despondency? Cuz that just sounds like the flip side of the fears and paranoia of the people that brought us Trump.
 
More like, the prophecy of demographics was early.
 
This doesn't compare to anything before. Those voters are gone, and having seen the effectiveness of these laws, it's only going to happen more. The Conservative controlled Supreme Court will uphold Gerrymandering and will uphold these laws. They already caused all of this by the Shelby County decision. The fact is, much of what people fought and died for during the Civil Rights movement has been stripped away. America is not a Democracy. Our elections are not free or fair. Things will never get better. There is no future. There is no hope.
 
Virginia Democratic Party removes black Lt. Gov candidate from promotional fliers-- the official "reasons why" are spurious, at best...

http://www.theroot.com/white-democratic-va-candidate-for-governor-leaves-blac-1819655705
Black candidates are in this bind all over the country: Run as a Democrat and you compete against two parties—Republicans and white Democrats—both of whom seem intent on using black people as a symbolic wedge or voting cattle, but not as equal partners in the governing process. Chances are Northam and Virginia Democrats will patch this up before the story moves from 24-hour blip to 72-hour tsunami, but this never should have happened to begin with.








For some reason, when it comes to African-American candidates, the basic rules of party loyalty, organization and strategy don’t seem to apply.

This is a governor’s election, not a junior high sleepover. No one should be getting removed from flyers or having their image blocked over one issue, when obtaining state power is the overall goal. The Democratic “resistance” can’t happen without black voters, black fundraising and black organizers; if Democrats can’t even figure out how to keep black statewide candidates on campaign materials, they’ll have no one to blame but themselves.
 
I hate to say it, but it doesn't sound like the democrats will be ready by 2020. They're still doing Hillary versus Bernie
 
I hate to say it, but it doesn't sound like the democrats will be ready by 2020. They're still doing Hillary versus Bernie
If Tom Perez remains and Bernie/Keith Elison supporters are kept off the Rules and Executive Committees there will be no realy unity in 2020 but there barely was any in 2016 and the dems would have won if not for clinton and tpp
 
So now Bernie is concerned with the running of the DNC?

Remember, he isn't a Democrat.

As for 2020, we still have a year, ideally.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"