Democrats In The Wilderness

Dems need someone with broad appeal to lead the party:

 

I think there's a difference between independent and unaffiliated. No way am I actually joining no Green Party.

 

independent of the party duopoly? what's wrong with the greens?

 

They have an image problem. A new coalition party with a serious agenda and cogent plan would be be more realistic.

Outside of that party, an unaffiliated voter, at least in open primary states can vote for policies and agendas without regard to party.

It's quite liberating, actually. As much as I'd like to return to the Dems, I'm not going to say never.

 

Oh, I know centrists don't either but these progressives are the ones demanding single payer yet when we moved closer to it than ever before, the Dems got killed at the pols! Apparently people rather be right than win!

 

When too many people start to like the band you like it must mean that you made the wrong choice.

 

So do you want them involved or not!? You can't complain about them being disinterested and then bitsch about them participating! You don't get it both ways. [emoji108]

 

Speaking of being active...never mind the messenger...they're here and they're not going away. How 'bout dah?

"What’s clear is that Sanders’ large and politically active following has stopped Democrats from confronting him directly — including when it comes to offering alternatives to his Medicare-for-all measure. Many still remember the swift and angry January response from grass-roots progressives including Sanders supporters toward Booker for a symbolic drug importation vote, and toward Sen. Elizabeth Warren for her procedural vote in favor of Ben Carson’s nomination as Housing secretary."


http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/07/bernie-sanders-democrats-medicare-primaries-241388?cmpid=sf

 

Have you read the article in the Atlantic about how our politics got this way? There is a thing called politophobes. These are people that are afraid to try and understand politics and usually believe that problems would be solved if all politicians would just do this or that. The "this or that" is some belief that politophobe has regarding politics so it could donations, stop being greedy, etc, etc.

You combine that with the article @ceezmad cited in the Trump presidency thread about how 90-94% of people don't actually paid a lot of attention to political news and stuff and that is where we are.

I believe the Dems should try and get them back but promising them stuff that can't be delivered isn't gonna work. The idea that a Democrat running for office in a red or purple state should openly come out in favor of single payer, though they might support it but it would crush their campaign is the height of idoicy but that is what the Bernie wing is now demanding.

What is funny is when @MatthausSammer asked Macedonian Frank about finding such a candidate the best he could do was name a guy who lost in Kansas. That Kansas loss shows how much a politophobe Frankie is. The DNC had a limited amount of funds for 2017 special elections since the 2018 midterms are coming up. So they chose one race, Georgia 5th. Now why that one can be debated since either of the other two would have been just been as an uphill Battle. The guy that outperformed in Kansas was in a district that is home to the Koch Bros so it was gonna be really tough. The guy's success can be attributed to avoiding social issues, not mentioning gun legislation, and focusing on local issues. He avoiding behaving like the kid of far left liberal that Kansasians have shown they don't like.

 

Me: Glad you joined the fight, here is what I need you to do.
Progressive: I want to lead the fight for single payer.
Me: Great we need sign makers, organizers and cheerleaders and door knockers.
P: No want to write policy and legislation.
Me: Errr... What is your experience in that.
P: None but I know what the people want.
M: How do you know that?
P: It is what me and my friends and what we all want.

You see my point is, it is great that they want to be part of the movement to dictating policy and directive is a bit far.

 

You're painting with a pretty broad brush. Those inexperienced folks helped Sanders win what? 21 states? I also think you I overestimate the party and, what seems to be, your proficiency in winning elections. Doncha think?

You want a bunch of bitschbois making signs. That's not what the progressive wing is there for. Compromise is a two way street.

 

I may have to agree with BK here, with the huge exception of Trump becoming President.

I am not sure I would have voted for Sanders if he won the primary except vs Trump or Cruz.

If Sanders had won and someone other than Trump/Cruz had won on the repug side, I would have voted 3rd party.

Even more if in 4 years the far left gets their candidate to run against Trump, I will vote for the democrats, but if Trump and Pence are in prison and it is between an American Hugo Chavez vs a typical Republican I would vote 3rd party.

So in a way I do understand BK, except vs Trump, Trump is so bad, that I do not understand.

 

I was listening to Pod Save America and they touched on the Progressive -Rest of Party rift. I owe @Boandlkramer a bit of an apology. Though I feel like you represent these Bernie bros, what you are, are one of the people that have been in the party and demanding it push further left for years. Like you, I am disappointed Obama didn't steamroll the republicans like how they steamrolled the democrats, when they were in power.

However, articles like this http://theweek.com/articles/715955/why-leftists-dont-trust-kamala-harris-cory-booker-deval-patrick do no one any favors. They appear tone def and only reinforce the belief that progressive will sell minority issues out in a heartbeat in the belief that a fair economy fixes everything. It is part of the reason Bernie did best in predominatly white states. The Dem party must the party for economic justice, social justice and civil justice.

 

I'm pretty sure we all want the same thing, I just feel the same urgency as the right does about their agenda.

 

“There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year — not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak — a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial “hack,” as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.”

So says an extremely well written and carefully put together column by The Nation’s Patrick Lawrence about research that has been done by the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. The article contains a lucid breakdown of the publicly available information about what VIPS has uncovered, as well as some material based on interviews with members of the team

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/...the-intel-community-addresses-it-97971ba90450

 

Kamala Harris has matched every one of her progressive achievements with conservative ones.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/08/kamala-harris-trump-obama-california-attorney-general

 

Is there some reason we can't fight Trump now, and postpone the Kamala bashing until she actually runs for President?

Honestly, her record in the Senate, as my Senator, is stellar, and the attacks are distorted, sickening and counterproductive to the progressive movement. Whom exactly is she threatening right now?

 

Apparently the narrative has already begun about "racism" and "misogyny"

https://www.pastemagazine.com/artic...-harris-controversy-reveals-everything-t.html

Here are some facts...

 

He's not the least bit interested in fighting Trump. His posting history makes it clear.

The fact that his characterization of Clinton is pretty much identical to that of the Fox News party line, if not that of the "alt-right," makes that clear.

 

You call them facts, I call them propaganda. All dressed up in a pretty chart.

I did not bring up misogyny or racism, funny that you had to refute a "narrative" before it arrives.

Trump. Republicans. Focus.

 

There no such person right now. All that the democrats seem to have right now, is opposition to Trump, that can backfire if the economy roars or if Trump picks an easy war to win, people are svckers for easy military victories.

 

Ya know, it's possible to have the opinion that Hillary is hawkish and an awful campaigner with a colossal war chest funded in part by the Saudis and not be "alt-right".

You're typically non-hysterical and reasonable enough to know this.

 

The economy is pretty much at a point where a recession or at least a huge correction is inevitable. High market, low U3, stupid levels of confidence...there's nowhere to go, plus there are structural problems. The Fed can delay things, but not forever, and by financing this weakass recovery the way they have, they've given themselves almost no room when shit does hit the fan.

Unfortunately, that makes some stupid war much more likely. Note that these conditions were going to prevail no matter whose 8th month we'd be entering.