Current Topics
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by Greger
50 minutes 42 seconds ago
RoundTable for February 2019
by Greger
Today at 06:25 AM
Justice is coming
by Greger
Today at 06:09 AM
The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist?
by chunkstyle
Today at 03:40 AM
The NYC/Amazon Deal
by Greger
Today at 12:06 AM
Political Correctness run amok
by Greger
Yesterday at 06:07 PM
Takeover
by chunkstyle
02/19/19 03:11 PM
The Green New Deal, explained
by pondering_it_all
02/19/19 05:44 AM
Great white sharks likely pushed the massive megalodon to extinction
by Jeffery J. Haas
02/17/19 08:30 PM
The Passing Parade: Obituaries: 2019
by Golem
02/16/19 10:22 PM
Trump's New Toy - NATIONAL EMERGENCY
by NW Ponderer
02/16/19 01:42 AM
Middle East Conference
by jgw
02/15/19 05:35 PM
Epitaphs
by logtroll
02/15/19 01:48 AM
The Twilight Zone - All Openings (1959 - 2002)
by Ken Condon
02/14/19 10:45 PM
Why are Republicans So Afraid of AOC and Omar?
by rporter314
02/14/19 09:05 PM
SMR (Small modular reactor)
by Greger
02/13/19 08:37 PM
A possible run on America?
by jgw
02/13/19 06:54 PM
the guy who used to own starbucks
by jgw
02/13/19 06:47 PM
Healthcare
by jgw
02/13/19 06:43 PM
It can never happen here!
by Greger
02/12/19 10:16 PM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16495 Topics
284454 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 1 of 24 1 2 3 ... 23 24 >
Topic Options
#309352 - 11/12/18 01:44 PM Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Cuz Ojeda is...

Although I'm a bit concerned with having a militarization of the party happening I think he will compliment Sanders authentic populist message and force the narrow band of accepted conversation open. To have alternatives to the "third way" thinking that reigns over the party.
We saw how the party was opposed to a diversity of thought in the 2016 election, preferring instead to hold a coronation of the 'annointed one'. I truly hope that the primary is a deluge of candidates making the management of and control over the primary much more difficult for the mandarins.

Top
#309353 - 11/12/18 03:48 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Ujest Shurly Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 385
Loc: Sterling Heights, MI, USA
Ok a possible candidate.

But, I have a couple of questions. If he retired with 24 years, why was he only a Major?

Well, the above questioned answered; He was prior enlisted before entering OCS.

Why do some of his words sound frighteningly similar to a recent Presidential candidate?

Does he have a prosthetic leg?

Not looking for answers from anybody here. The questions will be answered in time: before I make my decision as to who to support for the primaries and the race.


Edited by Ujest Shurly (11/12/18 07:31 PM)
_________________________
Vote 2020.

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
#309356 - 11/12/18 06:16 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Both Sanders, Trump and now Ojeda are speaking to the reality that most Americans are experiencing whereas the centrist Democratic right wing refuses to acknowledge, must less deal with, that reality. : 'America is already great!'.

I guess we have to decide which is being a phoney populist and whose being sincere. As always, who's benefiting.

Leg?
Military rank?


Edited by chunkstyle (11/12/18 06:17 PM)

Top
#309357 - 11/12/18 06:29 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Who? I've never heard of him.

Name recognition isn't everything but it's something. Beto O'Rourke became a household name during the midterms. Ojeda didn't exactly set the world on fire with his no nonsense militarized liberal message.

Didn't we have a ex military democrat running in 2016? One with much better name recognition nationwide? I can't recall his name right now because guys like him are so easily forgotten.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309358 - 11/12/18 07:34 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Greger
Who? I've never heard of him.

Name recognition isn't everything but it's something. Beto O'Rourke became a household name during the midterms. Ojeda didn't exactly set the world on fire with his no nonsense militarized liberal message.

Didn't we have a ex military democrat running in 2016? One with much better name recognition nationwide? I can't recall his name right now because guys like him are so easily forgotten.


Your referring to that tall glass of room temperature centrist water that was reporting for duty?
Yeah I forgot what he was for, too.
All I can remember is he fell off a boat in a place called Veetnam.

Top
#309359 - 11/12/18 09:41 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
"Kerry headed into that summer running an ad that highlighted his military service, showed him in fatigues, or posing with his arm around John McCain. The ad boasted about how he’d broken with his party to support a balanced budget. He was no down-the-line Democrat, not this guy. He was almost Republican!

Once Kerry became the nominee, though, Republicans easily blew up Kerry’s supposed strength with the lurid Swift Boat campaign — it’s amazing how that stuff works with weak candidates, but sleaze campaigns like the Bill Ayers or Jeremiah Wright business bounce off the likes of Barack Obama."


Well this is timely


Edited by chunkstyle (11/12/18 09:41 PM)

Top
#309361 - 11/12/18 11:00 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Actually I was talking about Jim Webb.

Ojeda voted for Trump. Says he's never voted for a Democrat for president. He's a military minded authoritarian with a new leftish outlook. Fidel Castro was like that once.

Nope. This dog aint gonna fly.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309363 - 11/13/18 01:37 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
I think the democratic leadership has done a wonderful job of blurring the lines between republicans and democrats in their traditional roles. They've had no problems running garbage barge candidates, conviently reflagged from republican to democrat as long as they had the money to buy in to the club. Many a good progressive got primaried by the DNC in this way.
Likewise they've also had a love affair with veterans for as long as what? Carter maybe.
Ojeda may not make it but what he does understand is the power of campaigning. Ditto with Sanders. Hence the insurgency of bold progressive issues that candidates felt empowered to run on in this mid-term.
Hopefully Ojeda will push the door open even more. I'll take bold inclusive populism over politely served neoliberal fascism any day.

Top
#309364 - 11/13/18 02:52 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
So you'll choose the Trump voter over Beto?

Leopards seldom change their spots. Ojeda is a conservative. Better I guess than any Democrat when you hate Democrats.

Come to think of it...I've never heard you say a single thing bad about Republicans...You always deflect everything to make Democrats seem worse...

are you a troll of some sort?
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309365 - 11/13/18 03:12 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Greger
So you'll choose the Trump voter over Beto?

Leopards seldom change their spots. Ojeda is a conservative. Better I guess than any Democrat when you hate Democrats.

Come to think of it...I've never heard you say a single thing bad about Republicans...You always deflect everything to make Democrats seem worse...

are you a troll of some sort?



I expect republicans to act as republicans. Their masked contempt for average Americans has always been about a millimeter below their surface congeniality.
But it's the Democratic Party that gets me riled. It's the phoney 'I feel your pain' disengeniousness and betrayel and undermining of progressives, labor, working poor, children, etc...
If it's true that leopards don't change their spots with regard to Ojeda, would it not also be true of a Goldwater Girl?
Rumor has it she's running. Running on her resume and hubris that her fans will be sure to overlook, ignore or be satisfied with. On the other hand, like Lieberman had, there's a D next to her name so that's gotta count for something right?

Top
#309366 - 11/13/18 03:55 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
She's not running. But if she did she'd stand a far better chance of winning than this jingoistic hillbilly.
And she'd make a far better president.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309368 - 11/13/18 11:07 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Nice to know she's not a war like patriot. I'm sure folks in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria would have appreciated knowing that during her time as a Senator of NY or Secretary of State.

Let's hope your right Gregor. Her followers are about as fanatical as any MAGA heads. Still, that publishing of her book 'How everyone else screwed up' or whatever it was called, looked like a typical publishing prelude for a politicians intent to run. Have to wait and see.

You didn't answer the question of Leopard spots.

Top
#309371 - 11/13/18 05:25 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Yes, let's see...leopard's spots.

Quote:
I feel like my political beliefs are rooted in the conservatism that I was raised with. I don't recognize this new brand of Republicanism that's afoot now, which I consider to be very reactionary, not conservative in many respects. I'm very proud that I was a Goldwater Girl. And then my political beliefs changed over time.
HRC 1996

In our own way, we are all conservative to some degree. Even yourself Monsieur Firebrand.
Some time back I was telling you about the advantages of sous vide cooking, you scoffed at it and insisted the only way to cook was with a crock pot. Do you even Instapot, dude?

I don't hold that one vote against her(this woman should be our president!)

I believed they had nuclear weapons or were building them,
I believed that there was a peaceful solution, didn't you?

So did she.

Left to his own devices, Bush would not have gone to war. I'm convinced that Vice President Richard Cheney saw it as a chance to make $Billions$ and pushed Bush into war.

You told me once, long ago, that Madame Clinton was a pretty good senator for your state. You've changed your spots a bit since then.

But this yahoo from West Virginia is who he is and this is all a ploy to get himself a lobbying or media position. Otherwise he's back on the streets with a choice of digging coal, selling dope, or getting a job in government. He's f*cking pro-coal, Chunks! What else do you need to know?
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309377 - 11/13/18 09:39 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
I can joke about peculiarities of cooking styles Gregor. I also understand the idea of not throwing the baby out with the bath water, which is all I see conservative being. That might be oversimplifying it a bit.

I did not believe the nuclear weapons program then. I believe it was mostly Saudi's that flew the planes into the T. Towers and I was disgusted with that criminal act being used as a justification for imperial ambitions. Senator Clinton felt another way about it.

She saved a VA from getting shut down in our area. It was an anchor to the local employment in much the same way as bases and prisons are to local economies in upstate NY. It serves a large veterans community that would have to have traveled much further to get medical care. I give her credit for that.

Ojeda might be all you say he is and maybe he is not. He's been trained to think in a military fashion and that concerns me. On the other hand, he is speaking directly to people's real life situations without a bunch of word craft which sounds like something but doesn't commit to anything. I'm amused that you would condemn his campaign from the outset before he's done anything to confirm your suspicions but defend the Clintons that have proven, to many progressives, our worst fears about them. I could go into the horrendous list but she has an almost cult like status to her fans. Madness that way lies.







Edited by chunkstyle (11/13/18 09:41 PM)

Top
#309378 - 11/13/18 09:41 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
She would have been a terrible president.

Top
#309379 - 11/13/18 10:22 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Whoops! Your right Gregor. My fault, I got confused about Hillary's run

Slight discrepancy


Edited by chunkstyle (11/13/18 10:23 PM)

Top
#309380 - 11/13/18 11:22 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Quote:
She would have been a terrible president.


She would have been 100 times better than what we have now. Just think of all the insane things Trump has done, and I doubt she would have done any of them. We would have fixed the ACA/Medicaid gap, and might even have government options on their way to becoming single-payer.

Top
#309384 - 11/14/18 03:09 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Or just do single payer like progressives have demanded for years now.

Top
#309385 - 11/14/18 03:10 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
She was a war hawk neoliberal.
It's ironic that the ultra right has to create Clinton murder fantasies for their ultra right followers as her involvement in the death and destruction of brown skin people aren't offensive to them.
On the other hand, her fans are offended by the evil conspiracies that have been leveled at her but never confront her murderous foriegn policy decision. Apparently killing brown skin people is not that offensive for them either.
Interesting times.
Latest whispers are that she's preparing a full on progressive presidential agenda to run on in 2020. And why not if the rumors are true? She saw it work for Obama and blocked her run. She almost suffered the same feat by a genuine progressive socialist.
Third times a charm? Well see...


Edited by chunkstyle (11/14/18 03:22 AM)

Top
#309386 - 11/14/18 04:04 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
William Jennings Bryan ran 4 times. A Democrat but stood for everything Republicans consider holy these days. That was back when Republicans were the progressive party. Nothing ever really changes.

Really. Nothing.

I aint crazy about Biden running either. I love Uncle Joe as much as the next man but it's time for him(and Clinton and Bernie) to bow out and let the young guns fight it out.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309387 - 11/14/18 04:48 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3842
Loc: Eugene, OR
So--thinking back I was about eight years old. My father was a pragmatist, my mother an artistic type dreamer, and a very good musician I might add. It was Christmas. And I wanted a spaceship. That actually worked! That I could really fly and “go to the moon”.

So looking back, I suppose they both conspired to buy me that cardboard “spaceship” that would take me to the stars. On Christmas I was presented with it. Aside from being spurned during the first time I was attempting to be laid it was my worst disappointment of all time.

What? A phuggin' cardboard box that was supposed to take me into the glorious future and fly me to places unknown that I absolutely wanted to see? And that I absolutely demanded to see! Yet that goddam cardboard box never even had an engine. Or any other sort of power levitation.

Life is full of disappointments Chunky. I suppose sometime your perfect world where everything works in harmony will appear.....and the rest of the fools will fall in line

But I am not holding my breath.
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#309390 - 11/14/18 04:19 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
I think you took a long way around the block to let me know that life isn't perfect Ken.
Uhhh yeah.
I've lived long enough to see that in action and perfection is not what I'm talking about.
I have talked about neoliberal fascism, Clintonian triangulation, environmental destruction, and the boomers congenital nihilism that must be overcome and quickly.

Perfection? I don't believe I've asked for that.

Top
#309430 - 11/18/18 07:21 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
I think you took a long way around the block to let me know that life isn't perfect Ken.
Uhhh yeah.
I've lived long enough to see that in action and perfection is not what I'm talking about.
I have talked about neoliberal fascism, Clintonian triangulation, environmental destruction, and the boomers congenital nihilism that must be overcome and quickly.

Perfection? I don't believe I've asked for that.


But you've also consistently promoted voting third party when the so called "purity" of the Democratic Party does not meet standards.

Now mind you, I am not labeling you a "purity pony", but I suspect you might be able to see quite a few of them in the pasture you're standing in.
In the end, simple mathematics won't be kind. Someday that same math might be, and I would want to look forward to that day by supporting whatever it is that can tip the scales away from the two main parties and toward a third party.

Most of that, however, is generational work. It is tedious, expensive and slow moving. You're talking about changing a couple of centuries of ideas that people take for granted. You're talking about changing the thinking of millions of people all at the same time.

In the end, what Republicans do is capitalize on this and use it to their advantage. This time, that gambit didn't work as well as they hoped. This time, a lot of very liberal committed soldiers found their way into Democratic Party seats.

You may want to tip your hat grudgingly to acknowledge that.
But I could be wrong wink

PS: Ken, the first time I got laid, I was hoping for someone who resembled a Playboy centerfold, voluptuous, worldly wise and madly in lust with me.
What I wound up with was a skinny blonde teenybopper with 70's aviator glasses who was as inexperienced as I was, and who had a mom who showed up unexpectedly when she should have been at work. attn

Still, I persisted...bite the pillow, I was going in dry, and I'm sure she spent that one minute or less staring at the cottage cheese ceiling wondering if this was really what it was all about.





_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309432 - 11/18/18 04:47 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Go ahead and vote for the banana sticker of your preference Jeff. If I have a lousy candidate I'll vote green or leave it blank. That's also voting. That's not purity, that's you hectoring people. I'm not voting against my interests any longer.

Top
#309440 - 11/18/18 08:19 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Two points you brought up Jeff that i thought are worth responding too.

"Most of that, however, is generational work. It is tedious, expensive and slow moving. You're talking about changing a couple of centuries of ideas that people take for granted. You're talking about changing the thinking of millions of people all at the same time."

Not so. It was the boomers who, as a generation, reversed gears and elected Reagan and all that it represented. Reagan was a turning point, in my book, that ushered in a trove of right wing grift and faux freedom language. Even his own age demographic didn't support him. So how does your generational theory square a rejection of Keynesian economic theory and labor movement struggle being rejected in one generations time? Why is it incrementalism for liberal progressives and death of a thousand cut but 'revolution' for conservatives Jeff?....

"In the end, what Republicans do is capitalize on this and use it to their advantage. This time, that gambit didn't work as well as they hoped. This time, a lot of very liberal committed soldiers found their way into Democratic Party seats.

You may want to tip your hat grudgingly to acknowledge that.
But I could be wrong wink"

An embryonic number of committed progressives were elected to congress Jeff but it was not due to the institutional structure of the Democratic party. Instead it was mainly do to the long hard work of street level organizing, canvassing and get out the vote efforts on behalf of committed volunteers backed by separate funding sources than the customary traditional 'dialing for dollars' DNC. One could also request you tip YOUR hat to these progressive grass root efforts that got this small group of progressives elected to congress as well as many more down ballot victories. Victories that were won in regions that the upper class DNC had walked away from and written off as hopeless.
That should be telling you something in and of itself about the DNC makeup and direction. Don't equate progressive victories to the upper corporate party leadership.






Edited by chunkstyle (11/18/18 08:20 PM)

Top
#309441 - 11/18/18 10:49 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida

I'm satisfied with my voting record. But I'm not satisfied with the direction politics has trended these last few decades. We've landed ourselves into quite the pickle. Remains to be seen how, or whether, we will get out of it.

Taken individually, our votes mean nothing. Vote how you will or don't vote at all, it makes no difference. We're really just observers anyway.

2020 will be an interesting year. I think it will trend blue again. The senate map isn't as easy for Republicans next time around and I feel like Trump can be defeated by a populist candidate like Beto O'Rourke or even Bernie, should he decide to run again.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309442 - 11/18/18 11:37 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Two points you brought up Jeff that i thought are worth responding too.

"Most of that, however, is generational work. It is tedious, expensive and slow moving. You're talking about changing a couple of centuries of ideas that people take for granted. You're talking about changing the thinking of millions of people all at the same time."

Not so. It was the boomers who, as a generation, reversed gears and elected Reagan and all that it represented. Reagan was a turning point, in my book, that ushered in a trove of right wing grift and faux freedom language. Even his own age demographic didn't support him. So how does your generational theory square a rejection of Keynesian economic theory and labor movement struggle being rejected in one generations time? Why is it incrementalism for liberal progressives and death of a thousand cut but 'revolution' for conservatives Jeff?....

"In the end, what Republicans do is capitalize on this and use it to their advantage. This time, that gambit didn't work as well as they hoped. This time, a lot of very liberal committed soldiers found their way into Democratic Party seats.

You may want to tip your hat grudgingly to acknowledge that.
But I could be wrong wink"

An embryonic number of committed progressives were elected to congress Jeff but it was not due to the institutional structure of the Democratic party. Instead it was mainly do to the long hard work of street level organizing, canvassing and get out the vote efforts on behalf of committed volunteers backed by separate funding sources than the customary traditional 'dialing for dollars' DNC. One could also request you tip YOUR hat to these progressive grass root efforts that got this small group of progressives elected to congress as well as many more down ballot victories. Victories that were won in regions that the upper class DNC had walked away from and written off as hopeless.
That should be telling you something in and of itself about the DNC makeup and direction. Don't equate progressive victories to the upper corporate party leadership.






I was referring to third party votes, and fantasies about third parties overturning the two main parties in a lightning stroke.

You're referring to what is essentially party reboots, which I almost ALWAYS argue in favor of. Don't like the way the Democratic Party shapes policy? Take it over and remake it. It's been done several times in my own lifetime. I watched it happen and so did you.
Same with the GOP.

Party reboots and retools work, and as you pointed out, they can work in a terrifically rapid time interval.

_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309443 - 11/19/18 03:14 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Can't argue with you there Jeff. Retool, takeover, insurgency, you name it but it needs to be done.
The power of the primaries

Top
#309444 - 11/19/18 04:39 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
We're doing it.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309460 - 11/19/18 09:10 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
We're working on it anyway.

I don't think this administration is going to become more popular over the next two years and Trump likely won't be re-elected. Policy designed for no other reason than to own the libs isn't gonna fly in the long game. Even Our Corporate Overlords know that.

Raking the forests will not stop fires and owning the libs will not bring growth and prosperity.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309464 - 11/19/18 10:00 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3842
Loc: Eugene, OR
Quote:
Raking the forests


Yet that will be the perfect job for ol Donny when he finally and mercifully vacates the office he has so sullied. That should keep him busy for a while since he would have all the forests from California way up to Washington then over to Montana and Idaho to keep “clean"....

He will be in good shape though.
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#309465 - 11/19/18 10:10 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Jeff,
If Sanders is simply new deal democrat and all that that implies, what then would the current democrats in charge be? Just curious. I would like to get to the nub of that one.

Top
#309466 - 11/19/18 11:08 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I think Jeffrey is trying once again to hide the S word from the moderates. New Deal Democrats were Social Democrats. Socialism and even communism were pretty popular notions back then.
Capitalists had, after all, just caused a worldwide depression that led to WW2. Luckily the cold war came along and their propaganda machine was able to turn it all around and make it the fault of (you guessed it) Democrats, who are always communist sympathizers.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309470 - 11/19/18 11:47 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger
I think Jeffrey is trying once again to hide the S word from the moderates. New Deal Democrats were Social Democrats. Socialism and even communism were pretty popular notions back then.
Capitalists had, after all, just caused a worldwide depression that led to WW2. Luckily the cold war came along and their propaganda machine was able to turn it all around and make it the fault of (you guessed it) Democrats, who are always communist sympathizers.


Yes yes, hiding the dreaded and radioactive "S word" from the moderates, you nailed it.
And rightly so. Why not confuse the moderates and confound the RWNJ's?
I think it's an excellent tactic. Do you not understand the value that Frank Luntz and Lee Atwater brought to the Right over these last few decades?
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309473 - 11/20/18 12:07 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8942
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
I am eagerly supporting the New Green Deal Democrats!
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#309478 - 11/20/18 08:02 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: logtroll]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez seems to be emerging as their future leader. Or at least she's taking the heat from the right for the rest of them. She's young, she's smart, and I think she's having a good time.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309480 - 11/20/18 08:20 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger
Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez seems to be emerging as their future leader. Or at least she's taking the heat from the right for the rest of them. She's young, she's smart, and I think she's having a good time.


She's not all that smart, not just yet.
She's rolled out a few whoppers that revealed her lack of education on some core matters. I think she is indeed smart enough to get caught up but it better be quick.

But then again, in the last 10 years or so I have yet to find a single Trump or Tea Party Republican who knows anything about economics. Whether it's communism, capitalism, socialism, it doesn't matter because they NEVER get it right.
Instead they spew nonsense and namecall.
But they don't have the first clue about the true meaning of any economic system. They have alternative facts and weapons grade revisionism.

Ocasio-Cortez's lack of education can be fixed.
I'm doubtful one can correct demagogue true believers on today's Right.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309484 - 11/20/18 09:04 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Bernie/Ocasio 2020!....

Top
#309489 - 11/21/18 03:02 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Hey, I like her, great kid, great future, but not exactly VP material. She's 29 and inexperienced. Let's let her get her feet wet before we push her into the deep end.

And Bernie...I have the same doubts now about his executive abilities as I've always had and he's getting closer and closer to his expiration date.

She is too young, he is to old...Beto is just right!

_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309492 - 11/21/18 03:37 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
Still have to be 35 to be President. Goes for VP, too. O'Rourke got 4 million votes, in Texas. Ocasio-Cortez got 100,000 in New York.

Top
#309493 - 11/21/18 04:40 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Well that settles that then.
Yeah, I recall the press being flat footed in not even know who Cortez was when she unseated Crowley.
At the same time they seemed to be creating this battle for the soul of America narrative with Beto.
One wonders what else the press is missing in the crafting of narratives for public entertainment.

Top
#309496 - 11/21/18 05:59 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Speaking of the obtuseness of the media to catch whats going on out there, I try and follow those that have been calling it with more accuracy and bother to get out of the press briefing rooms and get in the street. We had a long history of those types of reporters and still have a remnant of that school. What I think seperates them from the rest of the infotainment types is their refusal to underestimate Trump and his canniness in reporting on him. Ralph Nader and Chris Hedges have been deadly serious reporting on Trumps political abilities.
Matt Taibbi has a timely article on the 2020 race just out today:
Trumps 2020 chances

Top
#309499 - 11/21/18 07:54 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Speaking of the obtuseness of the media to catch whats going on out there, I try and follow those that have been calling it with more accuracy and bother to get out of the press briefing rooms and get in the street. We had a long history of those types of reporters and still have a remnant of that school. What I think seperates them from the rest of the infotainment types is their refusal to underestimate Trump and his canniness in reporting on him. Ralph Nader and Chris Hedges have been deadly serious reporting on Trumps political abilities.
Matt Taibbi has a timely article on the 2020 race just out today:
Trumps 2020 chances



The mainstream press hasn't been obtuse. The execs at the top liked the money coming in from the ratings. That plays a much larger role in determining what gets reported and what doesn't.
That's the folly of "cable news".

Since Hedges, Nader and Taibbi aren't tied to that mast, they don't have to point their sails in that direction.

Innumerable sums have been spent in educating and conditioning the American public to accept profit-driven political entertainment as "news" in the last thirty years. If you were to turn on any cable news channel and you could see a cash register total spinning while they are on the air, you'd see it spinning faster when Trump is on TV.

An awareness of that would probably undo a certain significant amount of that conditioning, I daresay.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309500 - 11/21/18 08:57 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
I'm not disagreeing with what your saying about the profit driven market world that passes for news journalism Jeff.
What I was driving at is the ability of the media and their target markets to get high on their own supply.
The first, which is the basis of Taibbi's article, was the complete suprise of the prevailing narrative that Trump was a buffoon and that Clinton had the ultimate campaign machine that would, in the end, prevail.
The second was the Cortez primary victory that, much like Trumps, they didn't see coming and didn't understand what happenned.
Beto reminds me of that same obtuseness, willingly or not,for the realities on the ground. I see the same story telling going on with Beto's narrative. What really separates him from the centrist positioning that so many Americans are fed up with?

My guess is they will craft him as having some kind of Kennedyesque mystique since politics has now become entertainment branding for them to shape. Much like the 'Man from Hope' or 'Morning in America' commercializing. So long as he doesn't challenge the existing power structures and it's pipeline.

I don't think that head fake will cut it anymore. Time will tell.

Top
#309501 - 11/21/18 10:52 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294

Top
#309505 - 11/22/18 01:28 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Well, the neoliberal concensus is starting to weigh in and it looks like it's leaning Beto:
It's all bout the feelings y'all

Top
#309507 - 11/22/18 02:16 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
I think Beto O'Rourke was a terrific Senate candidate and is a very talented, inspiring politician. I don't think he's ready to be President, but, then, I wasn't sure Obama was, either. Turns out I was wrong then, and could be wrong now.

Top
#309508 - 11/22/18 03:14 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Ironically NWP, I thought Obama was ready when he ran based on what he was running on and, I'll admit it, I didn't mind that he had minority status either.
Unfortunately, I was wrong in the sense that he wasn't what he projected but was very good at projecting.
His biggest failure was the housing crises. Instead of taking lessons from the past and using the crises to change the neoliberal trajectory, he showed many he was of that cut of cloth. By all measures he did very little for working class Americans. He talked the talk but the walk? Not so much... No hope, no change.
That would be my biggest fear with Beto. Is he an empty suit that conservatives will play off of as they did Obama?

Top
#309516 - 11/22/18 10:57 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
That would be my biggest fear with Beto. Is he an empty suit


Well yeah there's that...he's definitely a tabula rasa. But the other candidates don't look any more promising to me so I'll ride this horse until I see a better one. He's got charisma and is a natural leader. He's got a pretty face and the press loves him, donors love him too. As president he would do pretty much what any Democrat will do. He'll sign the bills I want him to sign, choose cabinet members for their abilities, appoint judges who think like I think, and try to get along with our allies and stand up to our adversaries.

Obama started out okay but he lost the senate in his first midterm election so whatever agenda he might have had went straight out the window after that. He could have been a truly great president if Republicans were interested in having a truly great president.
There was never a jobs bill brought to the floor. There was never an immigration bill, nor an infrastructure bill. Republicans were absolute assh*les the entire eight years. Then they elected the assh*le in chief and continue to do nothing for working Americans.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309522 - 11/24/18 12:25 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
We'll have to disagree about Obama's start Gregor. I think he stumbled out of the gate with his refusal to go Keynesian and instead stuck with neoliberal policies. He stocked his administration with Goldman and Harvard. The results were catastrophic for the middle class.
I like Ojeda still. He's got some indignation going that's refreshing to hear and has an american populist tone. Some of that 'Raise less corn and more Hell' vibe.
Sounds like a fighter...

Top
#309532 - 11/24/18 08:12 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I can agree to disagree. Say what you will about Goldman and Harvard, their alumni have a pretty good idea how things work in the rarefied stratosphere of macroeconomics.
Remember the "shovel ready" infrastructure plans that Obama spoke of early on? He wanted to "go Keynesian" as you say, but the opposition pushed for austerity when government should have been bailing out homeowners trapped by predatory lenders and putting people to work. I think that stuff got pushed aside or bartered away as congress worked on the Affordable Care Act.
Then we lost the House and Republicans gained 6 Senate seats in 2010 and it was all over for Obama.

Ojeda's going nowhere. You can take that to the bank.
Beto might be. It just is what it is. The voters are going to swing towards whichever candidate strikes their fancy when the primaries start. All we can do is speculate which one it will be at this point.
Beto gained national attention in his Texas race against Cruz. Ojeda not so much, though he did splash into the headlines a few times.

Whoever says what most of the voters want to hear will get the nom.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309538 - 11/24/18 11:10 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Greger
I can agree to disagree. Say what you will about Goldman and Harvard, their alumni have a pretty good idea how things work in the rarefied stratosphere of macroeconomics.


Shoot, that aint hard to understand Gregor. High finance is simply a way to funnel money from the middle class and poor to the rich while shielding it from taxation, then loaning money back to the guvmint to fund vital services (or just cut em or privatize them) The poor and middle class get to pay for this upward funneling and offshoring of money. Goldman facilitates with Harvard business degrees. There's was a thing down state from where I live that was protesting this scam back in 2011:
Occusumthin...

Or are you diggin that neoliberal consensus?


Gawd, that bit never gets old...



You may be right about Ojeda but the point is, his campaign will be important whether he wins or not.
If Bernie hadn't run I doubt very much we would be talking about a lot of the ideas popular today (medicare for all, Green New Deal, legalizing weed, etc...). Ideas that the centrists will have a hard time getting rid of or villifying if it gets emphasized by enough campaigns.



Edited by chunkstyle (11/24/18 11:12 PM)

Top
#309539 - 11/25/18 12:23 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3842
Loc: Eugene, OR
Quote:
Shoot, that aint hard to understand Gregor.

First of all Greger ain’t no former Pope. As a matter of fact he is some sort of howling at the moon and dancing in the night pagan--or something of that persuasion anyway.

But I thought you folks might be interested in this recent article from The Atlantic:

Will the Left go too far?
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#309540 - 11/25/18 03:32 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Ken Condon]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
It's hard to say what's too far. Anything short of revolution is fair in my book. But it's really a matter of how far Our Corporate Overlords will let them go.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309546 - 11/25/18 06:15 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
'Never Trump' Republicans went Democrat in 2018. Are they gone for good? (NBC). The article doesn't answer the question posed, but it is an important question to understand, especially as important progressive agenda proposals are debated in Congress.

Top
#309548 - 11/25/18 08:05 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: NW Ponderer]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
'Never Trump' Republicans went Democrat in 2018. Are they gone for good? (NBC). The article doesn't answer the question posed, but it is an important question to understand, especially as important progressive agenda proposals are debated in Congress.


The perennial question for centrism: Should the democratic party act more like the democratic party or should it act more like the republican party so as not to offend the suburban vote. the reason I hate this article, NWP, is that it's a bunch of hot takes of the moment by quoting a raft of pollsters and PR firms for what it all means.
It had always come down to mobilizing the working and middle class by offering bold proposals that have popular support. These pollsters always look to their polling and try to divine the wind. I'd rather look to history and there was a time when the democratic party held a majority of congresional seats for decades. The obvious question, for me anyhow, has been 'so what's changed?'.
Pollsters and PR firms are only willing to go so far with that question.


Edited by chunkstyle (11/25/18 08:06 PM)

Top
#309550 - 11/25/18 08:21 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Ken Condon]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Ken Condon
Quote:
Shoot, that aint hard to understand Gregor.

First of all Greger ain’t no former Pope. As a matter of fact he is some sort of howling at the moon and dancing in the night pagan--or something of that persuasion anyway.

But I thought you folks might be interested in this recent article from The Atlantic:

Will the Left go too far?


Boy, whenever I see a link to the Atlantic my defenses go up Ken.
Pretty interesting walk thru the history of the progressive party and political groups mounting pressures on FDR, etc...
I take issue with the authors framing of 'leftism' as eventual chaos. Also could take issue with the 'backlash' of bold progressive legislation. I never saw these counterforces coming from popular opinion but rather from a top down assault by the entrenched economic interests from 1676 to the present day.
I do think Beinart is correct about the ideas mainly coming from the left that have any broad popular support. I don't think his 'INCOMING!' anxieties about republican reaction is fully accurate. I subscribe to the 'convergence theory'- that by and by more people will find agreement on the system being jacked up and working against their interests than what the reasons are. But you godda have ideas to meet the problems.

To that end, Sanders has released a 10 point plan that he believes the democratic party should adopt and run on. It very much reminds me of a similar plan taken by Labor in the run up to the snap elections in the U.K. It ran in the washington post as an Op Ed peice on thanksgiving.
Sanders go big or go home challenge

Top
#309551 - 11/25/18 08:42 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Never Trump' Republicans went Democrat in 2018. Are they gone for good? (NBC).

They are conservatives and will return to the Republican Party as soon as Trump is gone.Just because you can't stomach Donald Trump doesn't make you ready to jump the fence. They see Trump as a danger to the party

At this point I am convinced that you are born conservative or liberal.
Like "boys" and "girls" it is divided evenly at about 50% and as with sex, gender is on a sliding scale. I offer, as an example some, issues that fall dead center...
Trayvon Martin. Liberals will always side with the colored kid. Conservatives will side with Zimmergoon.

Abortion, same deal.

The 2nd amendment. Same.

The climate.

Taxes.

It goes on and on and on. Two tribes at war since time out of memory.
Some of the conservatives see Trump as an "outsider".


Edited by Greger (11/25/18 08:45 PM)
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309552 - 11/25/18 09:46 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Bernie's still got a bully pulpit and he's using it well.

We are currently witnessing an episode where the right is going too far. The obvious prediction is that eventually public opinion will swing leftish a bit, liberals will seize control, progressives will will pull them further left. Public opinion will swing right. conservatives will seize control...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309553 - 11/26/18 01:28 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3842
Loc: Eugene, OR
And the seasons they go round and round
And the painted ponies go up and down
We're captive on the carousel of time
We can't return we can only look....
behind from where we came
And go round and round and round
In the circle game
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#309555 - 11/26/18 11:12 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Is that SSDD Ken?

Top
#309556 - 11/26/18 12:29 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
An interesting op-ed peice from Hedges discussing the path towards neoliberal fascism. He quotes a lot from his recent video conversations with David Harvey on the history of neoliberalism.

The neoliberal road to fascism

As the Democratic Party becomes the party of the human hog farms of the wealthy suburbs, my fear is that it will find itself more wedded to the characteristics that define this large swath of Murica. An atomized society from which no culture grows or solidarity flourishes. It's organizing principle is consumption and convenience.
It's hard to see the Democratic Party escaping this cultural and political black hole. The irony will be when cannibal capitalism comes for them. What then?

Top
#309557 - 11/26/18 06:07 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
What then?


Revolution.

Wouldn't be the first time in history that the proles were overrun by the bourgeoisie and forced into revolution.
The US is currently undergoing a civil war of sorts. A simmering hatred of one side for the other. It's hard to get a proper revolution going when the proles are already at war with themselves.

The bourgeoisie control the propaganda and keep the proles at each others throats so they can't organize a revolution.

So, in conclusion...no revolution is possible when revolution is the only possible solution. Our corporate overlords have got us by the short hairs.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309682 - 12/03/18 05:47 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Uh Oh. there's gunna be some anger from the neolibs when they hear the jungle drums start beating again:
Sanders 2020

If he goes I wonder who he'll run with?

Top
#309689 - 12/04/18 12:44 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
He is 77. Maybe it's time to find a protege to promote. Maybe several proteges.
_________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

John Steinbeck

Top
#309691 - 12/04/18 01:35 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: pondering_it_all]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
If Bernie can rekindle the excitement he's a shoo in.

But...any Democrat might be a shoo in if the Trump train goes off the rails between now and then.

Sherrod Brown might be a name to watch too.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309692 - 12/04/18 02:20 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Yeah, Sherrod Brown looks to be the last democrat and will probably have to turn the lights off in Ohio for the Democratic Party. It's a shame he didn't back Sanders in the primary. Insiders said it felt like a real Betrayel for Sanders but that's politics. I like Brown. It. Can only help to have his voice in the mix.

Top
#309695 - 12/04/18 03:33 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
UMASS just finished a study that found the saveings would be larger with medicare expansion for all than the previous Koch study found. By a LOT.
At this point, with 70% of Americans in favor of a medicare for all plan and a huge cost savings to the country with better outcomes one wonders why any so called Democrat would not back this as a major campaign issue for 2020. Aside from the objection coming from market world of ideas...
UMass study
THere's another effort here in New York called 'Healthy New York' that has been gaining traction. It would essentially divert monies that the state sends to the federal agency and funds a state level 'Medicare for all' system administered by a state board of trustees. It passed in the state house but was stymied in the senate due to the actions of the IDC (independant democratic coalition similar to Congressional 'Problem solver' caucus). Those so called Dems got voted out in the 2018 mid terms and there is really no reason it shouldn't pass but we'll see. Then there's the Cuomo guy in the governors mansion. He's a problem.
I like this topic, made mainstream by Sanders, in particular because it exposes the lie that the markets are the best way to distribute resources in the most efficient way. This subject is visceral to most Americans and shows what a con the Neoliberal consensus has been.
I very much hope we will see 'Medicare for All' gain momentum for 2020. One wonders if Trump will hop on board as he did with the rest of Sanders populist message in 2016.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/04/18 03:55 PM)

Top
#309696 - 12/04/18 04:12 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
Sherrod Brown just got re-elected to the Senate. He can run for President and still serve in the Senate if not elected. I doubt it will hurt, and may buttress, his standing in Ohio. A Kasich-Brown contest would be fascinating. I like them both, but Kasich has too many Republican ideas.

Top
#309706 - 12/04/18 11:51 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
One wonders if Trump will hop on board as he did with the rest of Sanders populist message in 2016.


Which parts of Sanders' populist message did Trump hop on board with?
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309707 - 12/05/18 02:49 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
One wonders if Trump will hop on board as he did with the rest of Sanders populist message in 2016.


Which parts of Sanders' populist message did Trump hop on board with?


The corruption of Washington politicians.
Healthcare
Nafta, trade, jobs
De-industrialization
Solidarity with working class, etc etc

Top
#309713 - 12/05/18 10:00 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
I wouldn't exactly call making a lot of false promises "hopping on board".

Top
#309714 - 12/05/18 03:29 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
It goes back to the notion that "fascism is a populist movement without a left option".
Fascism has historically coopted language from the left and is doing it today. Here as well as Europe. The latest is the yellow vest protests in Paris where you see both socialists and fascist competing for the messaging and neither ceding the public space to the other.
Trumps no dummy in certain arenas, though it helps some people to think he is. His record is cunning self preservation and he'll steal any credit for something that's popular. He used the language of populism on his campaign trail. Mixed in with racism and xenophobia but a good deal was populist. My guess is he saw how well Sanders was doing started talking about the issues that he saw Sanders succeeding with. Issues that the Democratic establishment failed to take seriously at the time.
That may be changing now. The public is there on this issue but, unfortunately, the parties donors aren't. See Joe Manchin for an example.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/05/18 03:29 PM)

Top
#309755 - 12/08/18 06:44 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
One wonders if Trump will hop on board as he did with the rest of Sanders populist message in 2016.


Which parts of Sanders' populist message did Trump hop on board with?


The corruption of Washington politicians.
Healthcare
Nafta, trade, jobs
De-industrialization
Solidarity with working class, etc etc


I'm hesitant to link all of those directly with Sanders because I am somewhat convinced that Trump wanted to address NAFTA, trade, jobs and healthcare all along. Here is what he was talking about long before Sanders even announced his candidacy.

"The America We Deserve" - Donald Trump, 2000

_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309763 - 12/09/18 01:22 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Yeah, I get what your saying Jeff.
Populism can come in different shades but the american form, to my understanding of it, has generally been inclusive and economically progressive.
Trump's been blending that tradition with the other, darker variant.
He did, in fact, spend much time on the campaign trail going after the same subjects as Sanders was. Healthcare, jobs, wages etc...
You may recall his reaching out to disaffected sanders supporters after he lost the primary and the SH!t storm was brewing over the fixing of the primary confirmed by the leaked emails.
To me, it's a sign of Trumps shrewdness and Clinton's obtuseness. That's not an endorsement of what Trump was selling. Just my simple interpretation of the campaign.

Top
#309768 - 12/09/18 03:41 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Yeah, I get what your saying Jeff.
Populism can come in different shades but the american form, to my understanding of it, has generally been inclusive and economically progressive.
Trump's been blending that tradition with the other, darker variant.
He did, in fact, spend much time on the campaign trail going after the same subjects as Sanders was. Healthcare, jobs, wages etc...
You may recall his reaching out to disaffected sanders supporters after he lost the primary and the SH!t storm was brewing over the fixing of the primary confirmed by the leaked emails.
To me, it's a sign of Trumps shrewdness and Clinton's obtuseness. That's not an endorsement of what Trump was selling. Just my simple interpretation of the campaign.


As it was, I was on a crap-ton of Bernie Facebook groups during that period and it's awfully difficult to interpret it as Trump reaching out to Bernie Bros for me, because I was seeing Bernie Bros talking about Trump before the Democratic Convention.
Scads of them had already made up their minds that the nomination was corrupt and tilted against Bernie and that they were in a mood to put Trump in just to teach America a lesson.

Never mind that, by refusing to be a Democrat, Bernie was up against Rule Numero Uno in the DNC:

1. Choose a Democrat as candidate, no choosing OUTSIDE the party.

Rule Numero Dos:

2. Protect the chosen DNC candidate at all costs.

I've expounded on this innumerable times, you cannot be outside the party and expect that party to help you in a POTUS race. It just doesn't work that way, it never has and it likely never will.

But anyway, a month or even two months before the convention, a lot of hardcore Bernie or Bust Bros were announcing their intention to vote Trump if Bernie lost the primary, again...just to teach us all a lesson.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309772 - 12/09/18 06:21 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
That's the point where I lost a lot of respect for the Bernie Bros: Not for Bernie, because he was honest and would have worked to fulfill his campaign promises. But anybody who really thought Trump would or could fulfill any of those ideas he usurped from Bernie was an idiot. And the Bros who voted for Trump in a fit of pique over the primary were self-destructive idiots as well.

Top
#309775 - 12/09/18 04:06 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Ok a coupla points.


1st. There has been a good look at the historical rate of party switching and the evidence of this 'Bernie Bro' (T.M. Hillary 2016) defection happenned in any significant number above that historical average can't be found. But yeah, you were on a posting page so i guess what? Evidence? Ok. Nailed it Jeff. 538 has done some good number crunching on this vote shift for 2016 but don't let em fool ya. Fake News!
2nd: you should look into the origen of 'Bernie Bro'.

3rd: the ridiculousness of your argument that it's ok for the party to rig the primary Jeff. Seriously? I'm as cynical as the next guy but for all the faults of the republicans (a long list to be sure) one thing that's interesting is that they don't mess with their primaries to the level of the Democratic Party. They leave the fraud and grift for the general election.
You wanna know why they don't? Because it angers a certain percentage of their base. Democratic Party leadership, on the other hand, has been carving off chunks of it's left flank for decades now.

4th: Bernie ran on the democratic ticket. If you want a protect at all cost rule to be a rule then enforce it Jeff? If that's the case ( in Jeff world but I'll play along) then why let him into the race from the start?

One possibility was that he could be used as a foil for Hillaries anointing. My guess is they let him in believing they could present a farce as a real competition but, suprise suprise, what they got was, in fact, a real competitor who's ideas and positions were very popular. At that point they could have fought a real primary battle or choose to rig the primary. They chose to rig the primary. They leaks only confirmed what Sanders supporters knew. Indeed, as many down ballot progressive primary candidate knows. It's all about the money and the DNC is there to protect that. That is the North Star of the party leadership Jeff. It guides their every decision and will be our neoliberal tombstone if we don't wrest control from these classist greed heads. Your 'they godda be party members' rule is nonsense. They have primaried good progressives with republican candidates that reflagged themselves democrats for DCCC support. Your rules are just that. Yours.

It's like climate denial. Hillary supporters just can't admit what a lousy candidate she was. Your simply enabling a party that needs serious reforming.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/09/18 06:36 PM)

Top
#309780 - 12/09/18 08:04 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I'm a Hillary supporter and I'll be the first to admit that she's a lousy candidate. It's her biggest weakness. Campaigning.
But I still think she would have been the perfect follow-up for Obama.
Instead we got a fellow whose strongest suit is campaigning. Once elected he had nothing to back up the sales pitch. No understanding of how the game is played and no respect for the rules. But a great candidate!

Both parties need serious reforming. Neither is liable to get it.

Because money.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309785 - 12/10/18 04:19 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 41128
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
Originally Posted By: Greger
I'm a Hillary supporter and I'll be the first to admit that she's a lousy candidate. It's her biggest weakness. Campaigning.

Ya' think?!? Hmm Campaigning M-F and taking weekends off. rolleyes

You'd think that Hillary acted like the gig was hers. coffee
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#309799 - 12/10/18 06:37 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Her policy positions (foreign, health care, minimum wage, race) made her a lousy candidate as well as her tone deafness and the campaigns hubris. For me anyway. The crucial battle ground states thought the same as well.
I'm still of a mind she's running again but time will tell.

Top
#309909 - 12/17/18 08:14 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Are we having some sort of contest to see how many Senate seats Republicans can lose in 2020? (The answer is 22.) This latest court ruling that ACA is unconstitutional should be ripe just around that time. Do you think maybe millions of people facing losing their health insurance will be inspired to actually vote in their best interests? Talk about a great campaign issue! Republicans just keep on shooting themselves in the foot. Complaining about ACA is a great campaign issue for them to get their (shrinking) fan base worked up, but God Forbid they actually succeeded. The backlash would be huge.

It's like abortion in that sense. A wonderful issue to differentiate themselves from Democrats, but if they actually got it banned, the voters would turn them out en masse.

Top
#309913 - 12/17/18 04:31 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: pondering_it_all]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
The headline: Trump says he would work with Democrats on 'great' replacement if Obamacare is scrapped (Politico). The reality: same thing he said two years ago, he didn't mean it then, either. He'll take what is already there and "rebrand" it, just like he did with all those Trump properties, steaks, wine, and NAFTA. What Dems need to understand is, even talking to the man is anti- democratic.

Top
#309919 - 12/17/18 10:34 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Democrats might just be able to pass a bill to change it to RomneyCare. They are almost identical, except RomneyCare had larger op-out fines. It would be pretty funny to watch Republican's attack one of their own presidential candidate's plans.

Top
#309920 - 12/18/18 02:14 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: pondering_it_all]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
It would be pretty funny to watch Republican's attack one of their own presidential candidate's plans.


John McCain pretty much became persona non grata when he diasagreed with Trump. Mitt Romney is the butt of Republican jokes already. There is no loyalty among thieves.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309925 - 12/18/18 03:42 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
True, the Party of Mitt Romney is not the Trump Party of today, but it would still be funny watching them jump through hoops trying to explain to all the Romney voters why Romney was a traitor. GOP is the Party of the Elephant, remember. Those old white guys are going to remember Mitt was the greatest thing since sliced bread, back in the day.

Top
#309932 - 12/18/18 06:52 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: pondering_it_all]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I never got the impression that Mitt was ever really well loved by Republicans, he was just a candidate who lost and dropped off the map. McCain had more going for him because he was a war hero and a Senator. Until Trump declared that no one who got captured could be a hero.

Always known as a "maverick" McCain stepped out of line and was kicked to the curb even on his deathbed. It's too bad about John McCain...he would have made a better Democrat than Republican.

But as far as health care goes I think we're on track to see younger people being able to buy into Medicare. One of Chuck Schumer's pet projects is allowing people 50 years old to buy in. We may see that pop up in the next two years along with improvements to Obamacare and more states buying into Medicaid. I really don't expect much to happen until after 2020 when Democrats take control again. History predicts that there will be a flurry of health care plans discussed, gains will be made, then Republicans will take control and chip them all away.

The most important issue in all this will be to insure that every detail passes muster with the strict constitutionalists. If that isn't possible then the law can't stand. Maybe our constitution simply rules out federally administered healthcare...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309934 - 12/18/18 07:57 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Quote:
Maybe our constitution simply rules out federally administered healthcare.


I really doubt that. It has no language anywhere saying health care must be private and it does have language about the general welfare of the people. So I think it comes down to money. If Medicare-for-all is cheaper than other alternatives, then I think it wins.

And that leads to the buy-in cost question. Obviously it is not fair to just sign everybody over 50 for free. People over 65 paid all their working lives for Medicare. That's why you need to move gradually or else charge people near as much as they pay for insurance now until they reach 65. There are a myriad of options for this, but the key is to get people over 65 to believe the new system is going to make Medicare stronger.

Top
#309941 - 12/19/18 07:33 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
South Carolina GOP open to canceling state's 2020 primary to protect Trump from challenge

Quote:
The Republican Party in South Carolina is weighing whether to cancel its presidential nominating contest in 2020 in an effort to protect President Trump from potential challengers.


As insane as you think it might get, it's bound to get even more so.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309943 - 12/19/18 09:43 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
You cannot have a football game between the Cowboys and the Redskins and then suddenly, a San Francisco 49-er runs onto the line of scrimmage and says that he's playing on the Redskins team.
Bernie refused to join the Democratic Party, and that means that he is not a Democrat, even if he says he is running "as a Democrat".
Because according to the rules of both parties, "running as a Democrat" (or as a Republican) might more accurately be:
"Running as if I was a Democrat".

There simply are no party provisions for people running "as if" they were a member, you have to BE a member of the party.
And so, because Bernie was NOT a member of the party, the party chose someone else. I'm fairly certain that, if it had been anyone else instead of Hillary, they would have done much the same thing, namely: PROTECT THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.

Because in the end, whether you and I agree what they did was immoral or even sometimes illegal, they did what a party is required to do, select a candidate and then protect them.

Right now as you read this, the South Carolina GOP is pondering the idea of canceling their 2020 GOP SC state primary ALTOGETHER, in order to protect Trump.

That means, if enough states cancel their GOP primaries altogether in 2020, NO ONE "running as if they are Republican" has a chance because no other REPUBLICAN PARTY MEMBER even has a chance.

When seen through that kind of lens, all of a sudden the DNC closing ranks around Hillary in 2016 seems rather tame by comparison.
Bernie, as much as I love the guy, should have tossed his silly and sentimental "Democratic Socialist" tag in the trash the day he set foot on Capitol Hill for the first time, because in reality, according to the work he has done, he's a liberal New Deal Democrat in the style (and largely platform) of FDR.

Had he done that all those years ago, I suspect that the DNC would have been transformed by him* a long time ago, and they would have had no choice but to run him in 2016.

(*Witness his considerable grass roots 2016 crowdfunding mojo - now extrapolate that out ten years prior all the way up till 2016)
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309946 - 12/20/18 12:07 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas


There simply are no party provisions for people running "as if" they were a member, you have to BE a member of the party.
And so, because Bernie was NOT a member of the party, the party chose someone else. I'm fairly certain that, if it had been anyone else instead of Hillary, they would have done much the same thing, namely: PROTECT THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.

Because in the end, whether you and I agree what they did was immoral or even sometimes illegal, they did what a party is required to do, select a candidate and then protect them.


OK Jeff. Breaking my posting hiatus after reading this gem.
If you don't see the contradictions here then I'm afraid you have been clinically traumatized with what is being commonly called Hillary Clinton Defeat Syndrome
What it is, basically, is deep trauma to the brain for Clinton supporters that occured after she flamed out in the 2016 election. Their brains need to protect themselves of the reality that she lost by having a horrible political record for many on both the far right and left as well as the fact that she was nakedly incompetent to win against one of the most unlikable candidates in modern history.
For the brain to do this it must make up an alternate universe of cockamamie rationale that explains that loss, often extending the logic to the democratic primary itself, as you have done.
Unable to find a tidy narrative to paper over the obvious fact that she was unexpectantly challenged by real politics of addressing people's material concerns and anger and a resultant exposure of the DNC coordinating with her campaign over her challengers, youve concocted a set of rules that, apparent to yourself, allow for the coronation of a nominee.
Coupla things with that:

There was a widely publicized contest where the VOTERS got to both, listen to the arguments, and then cast their votes in whatever state primary system they reside in.

What is the rule or governing authority over candidate qualifications that you are referring to that allows a candidate such as Sanders to run in the primary but not allowed to win it over party preference? Really. A link or citation would come in handy here.

I understand the MSM (looking at you NYT, WP) serving as basically an outpost extension of the Clinton 2016 campaign and running sanders down when er they could. That's fair and the press has sided with the neoliberal consensus for decades now and Hillary was their pick but the DNC?
Out of respect to your fondness for analogies, how much confidence would you have in a stock car race if one of the race teams had just loaned NASCAR a pile of money just before the race?

As mentioned before, there's a perverse comfort in knowing there's an equal amount of that there cognitive dissonance coming from the center right as there has been from the far right. It's just that the center right has more news channels to choose from.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/20/18 12:09 PM)

Top
#309948 - 12/20/18 05:26 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas


There simply are no party provisions for people running "as if" they were a member, you have to BE a member of the party.
And so, because Bernie was NOT a member of the party, the party chose someone else. I'm fairly certain that, if it had been anyone else instead of Hillary, they would have done much the same thing, namely: PROTECT THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.

Because in the end, whether you and I agree what they did was immoral or even sometimes illegal, they did what a party is required to do, select a candidate and then protect them.


OK Jeff. Breaking my posting hiatus after reading this gem.
If you don't see the contradictions here then I'm afraid you have been clinically traumatized with what is being commonly called Hillary Clinton Defeat Syndrome


You seem to have me confused with a Hillary fan.
Yes, Hillary Clinton is at least partly responsible for my son being alive, given all the hard work she did to make sure that the S-CHIP program survived.
But that doesn't mean that I wanted her to run for President...again.
2008 was enough for me, I knew she was a terrible candidate back then.
I also knew she was a terrible candidate after watching her dip her toe into the water in the first part of the 2016 campaign, and by that time I was already aboard the Bernie Sanders train.

I was maybe the very first "citizen-journalist" to cover his announcement, because he stopped by Canter's Deli right before his appearance on Bill Maher. There wasn't even enough time for most of his fans, which were already legion, to get to Canter's, so the room was sparsely populated. It was June 20, 2015.



But, putting aside your slightly condescending outlook toward what is basically a common sense look at how parties conduct their business, let's analyze what it is you think I'm trying to prove.

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
There was a widely publicized contest where the VOTERS got to both, listen to the arguments, and then cast their votes in whatever state primary system they reside in.


Yes, there was. Yes, people did.
And the Democratic Party had indeed already "crowned" Hillary before the first primary was even planned, and even released funds to her campaign ahead of time.
But that's beside the point, and the point, which you steadfastly appear to be ignoring, is this:

The Democratic Party would, under any other circumstances, open the field to any challenger, much the same as the Republicans did to seventeen of them, had it been a different stable of candidates.
Only one requirement was needed - they had to actually BE Democrats.

Can I point to a specific party rule in either party that flatly states that a party candidate has to be a member of that party?
Wow, where do I even go to look for such a rule in order to copy and paste the link?
Maybe Democrats.org...

Sure enough, in Article 9, Section 9 there is a clause which says that you might be right!

Quote:
Section 9. The Democratic National Committee shall maintain and publish a code of fair campaign practices, which shall be recommended for observance by all candidates campaigning as Democrats.
The Democratic National Committee Chair shall put in place a code of Democratic National Committee conduct concerning Presidential candidates and campaigns prior to each presidential cycle to ensure
fairness and transparency. The code shall address areas including, but not limited to: providing information to campaigns; agreements between the Democratic National Committee and campaigns; fundraising; and common vendors. This code shall be made readily available to Democratic National Committee and all bona fide Democratic presidential candidates.


Except, what IS a "bona fide" candidate?
Let's look further...

Well, Section 4 of Article One says:

Quote:
Section 4. Establish standards and rules of procedure to afford all members of the Democratic Party full, timely and equal opportunities to participate in decisions concerning the selection of candidates, the formulation of policy, and the conduct of other Party affairs, without prejudice on the basis of sex, race, age (if of voting age), color, creed, national origin, religion, economic status, sexual orientation, gender identity, ethnic identity or disability, and further, to promote fair campaign practices and the fair adjudication of disputes.


So it appears it might be a bit of a quandry, because while Article One/Section 4 talks about the DNC's responsibility to all MEMBERS, Article Nine/Section 9 talks about "all candidates campaigning as Democrats" but makes the vague stipulation that they must be bona fide, and apparently there is no further definition of what exactly constitutes "bona fide".

You know, it could be that this sort of thing has happened so rarely that the issue has never even come up.
Teddy Roosevelt tried setting up his own unique party called the Bull Moose Party but he was basically running on a Republican Party platform, just not AS a Republican. It didn't go anywhere.

I cannot think of a single other instance in our entire history where a candidate for POTUS ran "as if they were" a party member.
Plenty of people have run as third party members, but Bernie might be unique.

As for the media ignoring Sanders (AND giving Trump almost two billion in free air time) there has never been a dispute between you and me about that ever. I've said in earlier discussions that I grant you everything in that regard.
Maybe you forgot, because you appear to have forgotten that I was a Sanders supporter.

I think where I must have failed in your eyes is the moment where I decided, all alone in my voting booth, not to throw my vote down a blank hole marked "write in candidate" in the futile hope that the laws of the universe would suddenly change and thousands of electors would suddenly "go faithless" and choose Bernie after he had already bowed out of the process. (thus in effect giving my vote TO Trump)

And now you appear to have decided that, in reality, it must just be a temporary form of madness and that I am suffering from some kind of Hillary syndrome.
Talk about a perverse form of cognitive dissonance.

No major political party will EVER lend support to candidates who are OUTSIDE of their own party. That's because in all our 242 years, no party ever HAS.
Pretending that they suddenly would is a fool's errand.
It's like trying to look for anti-matter in a jar of Crisco shortening.

PS: Why are you on a posting hiatus? I sure hope it's not because no one is willing to accept your pronouncements on my mental health.
My mental health is as good as it can be under Trump.
I wanted Bernie to be President, it didn't happen, and I happen to believe that Bernie could have made the DNC his bitch.

You seem to think that a political party would be willing to lay down a brand new rule for a unique and otherwise unheard of situation, and I must be suffering from a syndrome to excuse a candidate I didn't even want to run.

Hmmmm...
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309949 - 12/20/18 06:46 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
I think Bernie just misunderstood what it meant to "caucus with" the Democrats...

Top
#309950 - 12/20/18 07:04 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Hillary might have been a poor candidate, but obviously Bernie was a worse candidate. Because Hillary actually won more votes than he did.

Top
#309951 - 12/20/18 07:22 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2319
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
An actual 'discussion' over non members of the Democratic party claiming the right to run as a Democrat. This is a VERY strange discussion. Apparently, according to those arguing for non Democrats running as Democrats means that the Democrats must allow anybody at all to run under their banner, ie. Nazis, Communists, Socialists, Aliens from Outer Space, Canadians, Mexicans, whatever........... (I know, that's crazy. On the other hand this is where some of the logic is headed)

If Bernie really wanted to run as a Democrat then he should have joined the Democratic party! It was that simple. On the other hand I also think that the Democratic party has a right to not allow just anybody to even join. It used to be that a political party also had a number of 'planks' under which any candidate, or member, subscribed to as it was the basis of the party. Now, however, nobody even seems to know, exactly, what the planks of either party actually are and candidates are, apparently, not necessarily supportive of said party planks. If this is true then I am not even sure what it means to be a member of either party.

Now, for the last - The anti-Hillary stuff is also kinda strange. She was a terrible candidate who won 3 MILLION more votes than the opposition. She wasn't all that bad a candidate but did have so-called strategists that REALLY screwed the pooch on this one. The Republicans simply out thought and out fought the Democrats. These are the same people who seem to be in charge these days too. Let me change that to "These are the same OLD people who seem to be in charge". These are also the same ones who watched as the Republicans took over something in excess of 80% of all State Legislatures and seems to have woke up one day and said; "Gosh, how in the world did the Republicans do that?"

My fond hope, in all of this, is that the Dems are, right now, having a LOT of discussions on just what the hell happened, how they are going to fix it (the Democratic party), how they are going to setup groups, across the entire country willing to sit down and think it through. After they are done they should come up with some party planks that actually describe how they want to be understood and seen, and also make sure that their candidates agree with said planks, or explain their reasons for not doing that. They could start, for instance, with having certain institutions socialized like; fire departments, police departments, public schools and healthcare. These are the things all citizens should support (I think) I also believe that, eventually, the Republicans are going to have to do the same thing after their dear leader is out of the way.

One last. Jackass is 72, Sanders is 77, Biden is 76. How about somebody that's a bit younger?

Just saying.............

Top
#309952 - 12/20/18 10:27 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: jgw]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
One last. Jackass is 72, Sanders is 77, Biden is 76. How about somebody that's a bit younger?


Beto?

He's a centrist, I get that. A white Obama so to speak. And the press is already ragging on his voting record and accepting donations from the petroleum industry. Not a real progressive, no true Scotsman...

I don't mind centrists if I think they might be swayed further left than their previous records might show. I don't need a socialist agenda. Just a president who will sign progressive legislation into law. And of course a congress who can pass progressive legislation.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309954 - 12/21/18 12:41 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger

I don't mind centrists if I think they might be swayed further left than their previous records might show. I don't need a socialist agenda. Just a president who will sign progressive legislation into law. And of course a congress who can pass progressive legislation.


Bow
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309956 - 12/21/18 02:45 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
That's really all there is to it. The press is pushing Dems hard to pick a progressive candidate. The more progressive the better. Because that's the horse race the press is trying to set up.
A Bernie vs Trump redux of the 2016 fiasco is what I think the press wants. It's a moneymaker. The glow was all on Beto after November but he's too mainstream for the mainstream press.

They're doing market research right now. Bernie can beat Biden if that's what it comes down to. Bernie still has the fire in his belly. Uncle Joe's day has passed, I'm afraid, it's time he drove his Vette into the sunset. He was never really presidential material anyway.

There's still a good chance that Beto catches fire even with the press trying to tamp it down. In age and attitude he's exactly what the country needs.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309957 - 12/21/18 02:50 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
And just for the record, my personal choice out of all the contenders would be Sherrod Brown. Of them all he would probably make the best president. But I just don't see it happening.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309958 - 12/21/18 03:10 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger
And just for the record, my personal choice out of all the contenders would be Sherrod Brown. Of them all he would probably make the best president. But I just don't see it happening.


Maybe Sherrod and Beto oughta sit down and have a nice chat.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309963 - 12/21/18 06:00 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2319
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I am not all that enthusiastic over Beto. He is, obviously, a GREAT fund raiser. All that being said he also lost his battle with the most hated member of the senate and, I think I saw a poll where Cruz actually won the title of most hated politician in America.

So, I am not against Beto but, I continue to wonder. I am also not against Pelosi but she, as one of the party leaders, watched whilst the Republicans took, I think, over 80% of the state legislatures. Seems to me a bit strange. There is, apparently, a group within the Democratic party which is bravely supporting people who are, basically, losers. I don't even think they are the same group but, rather, two groups, within the Democratic party, who are loudly voicing their support for, basically, losers.

I had serious questions whether the Dems would win big in 2018 and they did. I am simply pointing out that I seem to be really expert in worrying over nothing. That being the case my concerns above might also fit into that category too. I just hope that the Dems take a deep breath, and figuratively hold each other's hands whilst pounding out strategy and planks that make sense and appeal to the vast majority of those tending towards the Dems and away from the Party of Jackass.

Top
#309968 - 12/21/18 07:07 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: jgw]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Beto's a pretty face. Sometimes that's all it takes. There was never a chance in Hell that Beto could have beaten Cruz. The polls said it from the very start. Beto didn't win the election, but he beat the odds. He turned a race that NO Democrat could win into a photo finish barnburner. That's what raised all the eyebrows.

He could do the same thing in 2020, and maybe even win. But progressives will run massive negative campaigns against him because he isn't politically pure enough and drag out Jill Stein again. Republicans will label him a socialist and Russia will fan the flames on social media...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309971 - 12/21/18 08:18 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Jeff,

Well you have me up a stump. If you are siding with 'the Party', and perhaps that's what has me confused, Then I wish it was about being a Hillary defeat syndrome' problem. That is, if you mean 'Democratic Party' by the DNC and it's multiple fund raising and campaign committees?
If your talking decisions taken by the party then I would give that a second thought. Your saying that the party gets to decide who we get to vote for and are happy with the structures/barriers they have in place? Part of that would be double dealing during the primary campaign.

If so, then whats it all about?

Is it about winning? Then I would have to bring up the slow motion wipeout over the last few cycles. Or the ceding of major regions of the country that have assured us a republican senate for years to come.

Is it about giving up a battle today to win a long term decisive victory? That slow and steady arc of progress?.... We don't have that long. By most measures the needles are moving in the wrong direction on all the dials.
Is there some success with the leadership that I've overlooked that balances some of these negative gains over the decades?

Smart? Is it smart to allow a candidate into the race but have only done so after it was decided by party leadership who the winner should be and worked to accomplish that? It's not democracy and possibly not legal but it is something. Criminally stupid comes to mind. Why would you put on that performance? It's insulting to a large swath of your base and alienates who knows how many. Is that hyperbole? I dunno, I think it was a big pile of arrogance,incompetence, and corruption. They sure as heck heven't made it rain for a LOT of people. Donors maybe... The wrong kind for third worlders and underextracted but that's a differant kind of rain (death).
If they thought of it as a farce that would help to burnish Clinton's resume, who the hell are they to decide?

Progress? Name it cause most progress is going in the wrong direction. Against popular opinio, in many cases. Might be that primary thing. Manchin is on the senate energy committee and a ranking member is he not. Cortez's 'New Green Deal' committee will be recommendation only, with no subpoena power. A big majority of voters want to see something happen. Next stop: environmmental ecocide? What will the party decide?! Stay tuned because you can't always get what you want-for most people anyways.

Sanders was not a democrat?.... Then why was he allowed to run as such? His vote in the Senate maybe? He's his own man and if you've seen him over the years then you know he's not for sale. Might account for his popularity over Clinton's resume application. Not saying you weren't watching sanders Jeff, just trying to make a point.

Again, I don't know who you think the Democratic Party is and maybe I've misunderstood what you wanted to frame in your argument. I'll always be happy to argue against a neoliberal democratic candidate or a corrupted funding apparatus with you. You did get me off the bench after all. Might be some groaning about that but we are talking politics after all so....


Another perspective on Sanders running. By the guy from the front: Matt Taibbi's op-ed


Edited by chunkstyle (12/22/18 04:18 AM)

Top
#309973 - 12/21/18 11:10 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Yes, I've BEEN talking about "The Democratic Party as administered by the DNC", because in the end, like it or not, we're stuck with them as the arbiters of who gets the Dem money.

I didn't say that I like it, or that you have to like it.
I'm just filing my observations.

And believe me when I say that I wanted Sanders to win.
In the end it was as if he ran a valiant race, "with the parking brake on", because if you have to play ball with the DNC to get DNC money, he handicapped himself.

I'm not disputing your perceptions of the Democratic Party as a desirable party vehicle, I'm calling balls and strikes.
If you want to term the DNC as a bunch of immoral bums, you won't hear much protest from me. I have to stand in line at the DMV like everyone else, so I curse them roundly...but I need that driver's license.

Bernie running again? Not unless it includes a plan to make the DNC his bitch and hew them over to his side and his way of seeing things. I love the guy but this isn't Dungeons and Dragons, it's POTUS politics.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309974 - 12/21/18 11:15 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger

He could do the same thing in 2020, and maybe even win. But progressives will run massive negative campaigns against him because he isn't politically pure enough and drag out Jill Stein again. Republicans will label him a socialist and Russia will fan the flames on social media...


Are you saying that no one can fight the forces of Doctor Evil and His Flaming Propagandists and that Jill Stein is invincible?
I guess there's no point in ANYONE running then.

No...seriously. We should have bitch-slapped that stupid Putin-cow right from the get go and frankly, the Republican "SOCIALIST" tag is worn out. They overused it last time.

If that's the hill they choose to die on, we should make them die on it instead of circling wide and giving them snacks.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#309976 - 12/22/18 02:20 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
What are the balls and what are the strikes Jeff?
Actually, it doesn't matter. There are independant and growing alternative funding sources that are helping to run progressives up and down ballots.
Your arguing for the status quo. Fine. Or your observing and reporting I guess. My 35 years of observing the slow rightward drift of the Democratic Party has left me convinced of the statement that it no longer represents it's traditions but simply a sink hole for progressive energy or socialist ideas to disappear down for its donor class.
If this past week is any indication, by sidelining progressive causes, the party will continue its tradition of punching left while pleasing its donor class.
It's to be expected. I can't recall any progressive cause being accomplish from the party without pressure coming from outside. Someone else may be able to provide an example but I'm stumped. This current Democratic Party is so wedded to donor money I dont know if it's reachable anymore.
In the end, and listening to the climate scientists that's happenning now and no longer an abstract thing, we observed party norms and rules as they crafted them.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/22/18 02:34 AM)

Top
#309980 - 12/22/18 06:25 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2319
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
The Democratic Party is wedded to donor money - just as the Republicans are wedded to donor money. If you don't have the big bucks you win NOTHING! Beto, the apparent champion of the progressives got a lot of money but he was also a tireless worker and proudly went into every village and hamlet in the district he was running in and shook every hand he could find.

The trick, obviously, is to take care of the money thing. When the Dems take over the house they should pass a bill stating; "Money is not speech and speech is not money". I think everybody but donors and craven politicians would argue this one which is another plus for this one. I also suspect that if both houses pass such a thing that big money and craven politicians will take it to the Supremes. Again, them that actually believes that money is speech, etc. if the anti-donor class prepares a war chest to disallow the donor folk the ability to demonize I think everything might get interesting?

My thought, basically, is that the demonizers are very good at what they do and its REALLY time to fight back!

If the speech thing gets done then the other leg needs to be severed, ie. "corporations and organizations are NOT individuals and should not be treated as such."

Top
#309983 - 12/22/18 07:26 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: jgw]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: jgw
The Democratic Party is wedded to donor money - just as the Republicans are wedded to donor money. If you don't have the big bucks you win NOTHING! Beto, the apparent champion of the progressives got a lot of money but he was also a tireless worker and proudly went into every village and hamlet in the district he was running in and shook every hand he could find.

The trick, obviously, is to take care of the money thing. When the Dems take over the house they should pass a bill stating; "Money is not speech and speech is not money". I think everybody but donors and craven politicians would argue this one which is another plus for this one. I also suspect that if both houses pass such a thing that big money and craven politicians will take it to the Supremes. Again, them that actually believes that money is speech, etc. if the anti-donor class prepares a war chest to disallow the donor folk the ability to demonize I think everything might get interesting?

My thought, basically, is that the demonizers are very good at what they do and its REALLY time to fight back!

If the speech thing gets done then the other leg needs to be severed, ie. "corporations and organizations are NOT individuals and should not be treated as such."


Couldn't agree more, JGW, couldn't agree more.

Having worked recently on this very issue and had to collect signatures I can personally assure that you don't have to think about it anymore. Just know that for every day I spent collecting signatures, on any given day on the street, after asking people if they would enjoy talking about religion or politics (with a smile!) and letten em know what it's about. Chiefly passing an amendment to get money out of politics. You can do about 25 a day and out of those asked, 23 were in strong support while 2-3 would abstain from getting involved. Cut across demographics like a dozer! Income, political affiliation, you name it.

Here's the rub for me.

It ain't gunna happen. Or not from the top any ways.
It will have to come from the bottom. Neighbor to neighbor. I mentioned the history of any achievement for freedom having always come from pressure being applied from the bottom up. Some after much devastation, such as the civil war.
But this is Pelosi were talking about and my earlier fears of her doing a challenge head fake to get re-elected as leader have been well founded by her actions this week.
Coming up a bit short of campaign finance reform is the 'Green New Deal' plan as championed by Cortez and, by many on the left figuring, lead as well.
After all, this has been a signature progressive idea that had been championed by Sanders. It's currently polling at 81-82% approval. As far as I know, it still is a major rallying cause for progressives, environmentalists, engineers, biologists, economist and any other credentialed 'ists' you care to list.
Really, what can be more important than a livable earth with the ability to have organized society?
Pelosi? I'm guessing it's safe to say she's got other things on her mind. Cortez didn't get any position on the committee as far as I know and the left is pissed. Why the hell not?!
A lesser committee rank with no supbeona power, just the ability to make recommendations. Pelosi chose to appoint a congresswoman named Kathy Castor (I kid you knot) of FL. Know idea who she is but maybe Gregor knows.
One of the BIG goals of any committee member, by the progressives, was that they recieve NO fossil fuel campaign money. A position the party embraced for a minute in 2017, until Perez reversed it.
Castor's public comment on fossil fuel donations can be read here: Pelosi gal Castor

The left is pissed and the progressive caucus is fuming. It's my hope they make Pelosi pay with a pound of flesh down the line. Scuttle a tax give away she has in mind to bring some corporate interest 'on board' some neoliberal clap trap grand bargain etc...



Edited by chunkstyle (12/22/18 07:35 PM)

Top
#309986 - 12/22/18 11:38 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Castor seems to be legit. She's in the Tampa Bay area and has the backing of the Tampa Bay Times.

Quote:
Castor said the "climate crisis" deserves specific attention from a dedicated committee. House Democrats are holding an organizational meeting Thursday where a resolution is expected.

"These standing committees will have plenty to do," Castor said. "We need to raise the profile of the climate crisis. People are demanding action and don't understand why we're not leading the world on climate change innovation."
Link
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309987 - 12/22/18 11:48 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Cortez didn't get any position on the committee as far as I know and the left is pissed. Why the hell not?!


She's not even sworn in yet. AOC has a bright future in Washington but committee seats aren't usually given to newcomers.

This is just the beginning of the Green New Deal, with a little luck and enough votes to stay in power Democrats can make it happen.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#309990 - 12/23/18 02:55 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Nobody gets on Intelligence or similar powerful committee first time at bat. I think everybody gets a committee assignment or two. Newcomers may get on some crap committee that doesn't meet much or introduce many bills. There are plenty of things a new Rep can do that doesn't require a committee assignment, like network and help build a caucus. Talent will out. If she is House material, people will notice what she's doing.

They can also do things in their own district and get in the press for good stuff.

Top
#309994 - 12/23/18 04:05 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Checking out Castors voting record and she's pretty good on the environment. Has voted the right way on most all bills presented to her. Most don't effect her district though so you have to go to her donor base.
Her biggest appears to be real estate developers. I can't think of any reason why I should be alarmed about a real estate developer from Florida having negative environmental consequences, can you? It's not like theirs a history of environment being sacrificed at the altar of development and jobs.
But the pattern is clear and appears to be repeating. Neoliberals triangulating progressive energy into donor money by dissapating that energy. This is shaping up to be an all to famil iar repeat of that grift with the attendant defensive rationale of seniority, experience to lead, institutional norms being maintained, etc...
None of which has shown the competency nor velocity to deal with the pace of this unfolding environmental crises.
No mention of the amazingly fast rise rise of public awareness made of this issue and a 'New Green Deal' made popular by Cortez, Sanderd and the progressive left. No, time to give it to the mid management class of politicians. The ones who gave us that exciting 'Better Deal' that no ones talked about since it was recieved by the public like a still born pig.
I'm hoping to be surprised, but history provides no foundation for that hope with these corporate schills. I'm very much hoping the progressive caucus makes this choice cost Pelosi and Hoyer.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/23/18 04:23 PM)

Top
#310005 - 12/24/18 07:08 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I would hope that the Progressive caucus will try to lead more moderate colleagues into sensible legislation rather than to weaken the party with impossible demands the way the Freedom caucus has done for Republicans.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310007 - 12/24/18 09:34 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Ah yes. Impossible demands.
One would have thought an overwhelming public approval for a 'Green New Deal' would be impossible, given the current climate and what gets packaged as 'conventional wisdom' by corporate Dems and Corporate media. And then it's proved otherwise by the 'inexperienced'.
Nothing from past decades of political history shows the New Democratic Party can be persuaded to do anything sensible. Their record speaks for itself.
I hope the progressive caucus does push the party to the left again in the same way the Tea Party was able to move Republicans to the right. O.K. New Democrats helped but you get the point.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/24/18 09:35 PM)

Top
#310009 - 12/24/18 11:08 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8942
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
In any case, I am whipping up support in the New Mexico congressional delegation for our own version of a New Green Deal works program that has our forest restoration, biochar+energy, and agricultural regeneration at its core as actual models - not just some ideological wish.

Maybe showcasing success will have some influence.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#310014 - 12/25/18 05:05 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
I hope the progressive caucus does push the party to the left

And I think we're poised to see exactly that. I don't think it can even be avoided.The Green New Deal is brand new, give it some time to mature, Monsieur Firebrand, before calling for a pound of flesh from the wiley old politicians who know how to get things done.
Exciting times are coming after the dark Trump years are done.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310021 - 12/26/18 04:40 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
History Gregor....
History.

Top
#310024 - 12/26/18 06:14 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Allow me just a moment of optimism during this happiest season of the year.

I've felt for a long time that if we just give Republicans everything they want for a little while they will screw the pooch so thoroughly that they will never be trusted again.

They've gotten everything they want, they've screwed the pooch thoroughly.

Democrats will soon come back into power in a pretty big way and they've got a progressive mandate pushing the party left. It won't go as far left as you want it to, because money.
They won't even go as far left as I want them too, which is a ways off from the precipice which will tip power back to Republicans. That's the precipice where you hang out pointing down the cliff and saying "look how great things are down there..."

_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310025 - 12/26/18 06:38 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Nuts!
You yourself, as plenty of others on this board, grew up in a time that was politically much different than it is today. U.S. politics has shifted to the right. Both political parties.
I've advocated nothing further than what has already been proposed and in some cases, accomplished, by previous political consensus.
But neoliberalism has been the flavor of the last 4 decades and is the one the centrist have staked their claim to and will chose to die for (as many have already). It's a pathology more than a sustainable political consensus.

Top
#310027 - 12/26/18 06:57 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2319
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
You are, I think, absolutely right. I fully expect that, by 2020 our economy will be in the dumper big time. Then, of course, the Dems will get re-elected and also, yet again, charged with the task of saving the nation. They have a LOT of experience at this so they will get that job done. If history tells us anything it also tells us that the Dems will 'fix' the economy whilst being completely silent as to why the economy is in the dumper (Republicans, basically) and so, whilst they are 'fixing' the Republicans will have their demonization resources will be pinning the entire economic mess on the Dems and the Dems will just take it.

This is another one I am praying I am wrong about and that they will actually toot their horn as loudly as the other side toot their lies. I know, another exercise in wishful thinking......

Top
#310028 - 12/26/18 08:02 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
You yourself, as plenty of others on this board, grew up in a time that was politically much different than it is today. U.S. politics has shifted to the right.


US politics has always leaned right, racist, anti immigrant, anti woman and anti gay. Historically speaking it was practically yesterday when we had a civil war over slavery. It wasn't until 1965 or so that we actually granted full civil rights to black people. And even that only as a legality. People of color are still treated like second class citizens. Gays have only recently been allowed to enter the mainstream and that with considerable trepidation. Women continue to struggle beneath a burgeoning patriarchy.

And yer tryin' to tell me they've moved further right?

Maybe you don't realize just how downtrodden the downtrodden were not too many years ago so you can't see how far we've come.

Quote:
a time that was politically much different than it is today

No, it wasn't. It was Democrats vs Republicans. Labor vs business.
Rich people controlled the parties. A working guy couldn't get a break...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310029 - 12/26/18 08:26 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
I was politically aware from about 1960 on. I lived through all those years and things are certainly much better now, especially if you were a person of color or non-majority sexual orientation. For most of those years people were often killed (by lynch mobs, racists, gay-bashers, or government) just for being non-white or non-straight.

Sure, union-member working-class people were a little better off when the union actually meant something. But union workers were not the bottom rung of society: Far from it. And all those lower rungs were much worse off than now.

Top
#310031 - 12/26/18 11:37 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
U.S. politics has always been dominated by powerful interest to be sure.
Whats changed is the Democratic party embracing a market oriented philosophy and becoming openly hostile to it's left flank for the last 40 years. Labor unions, the remnants of the socialist labor struggles, are hanging on by their teeth.
Suffragettes, Anti-Imperialists, Socialists, Grange revolts,European Anarchists and Communists, etc... were the left. Driven to ground by the purge of the 50's, the left ain't what it used to be giving license for anyone to define it in it's absence from real politics or the economy. I'm not sure why, but white boomers went hard right dragging both parties with them.
We have some pretty good poverty going again and real wages have stalled out since the 70's with the profits now going almost entirely to the rich. Union membership is at an all time low as organizing is harder and harder. Minorities household is on track to Zero while fascists are openly running and, in some cases, winning political seats.
Nah, we haven't moved right. We got gay marriages (for now, wel'll have to wait and see on them revanchist judges Schumer help get appointed to federal benches).
PIA, what are you saying? I cant tell as your first sentence about unions is contradicted by your second.
Yes, union s were organized at the working class level. That's why they organized! So they would get pay raises and benefits so they could escape being working poor. What am I missing here? Union workers are still better paid than their non-union peers. This has ben getting understood again lately and there has been a upswing labor activity. In case you didn't know it, striking gets the goods!
Workers are better off today because money made concessions to labor to end hostilities. Overtime rules, time off etc... You think JP Morgan came up with that?

Top
#310032 - 12/27/18 03:50 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I could be wrong about this but I think non-union workers became jealous of union workers getting paid more for the same work and started voting against unions...and thus we got "Right To Work" laws.
Politics hasn't necessarily moved right, it has moved to stupid.

Also I think everyone here realizes we have entered into another "Gilded Age" and something is going to have to stop it. This is typically the job of the "left" and things being what they are, it's going to fall on the Democratic Party to actually become the left after a long comfortable run in the middle.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310034 - 12/27/18 02:34 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Wage resentments may have played a role Gregor. It is a very real thing that management class types have used to denigrate unions.
Weakening unions has been an avocation of the rich since organized labor reemergence in the 1930's. It's been a multigenerational project for some families, such as the koch's.
Shifting production from areas of high union organization and leftist politics to low unionization, if any at all, and relatively little left wing political thought began in the 50's.
Meat packing moved out of the Midwest and furniture making moved out of New England.
Similar legal efforts were made to curtail and restrict the ability of organizing work places in the south and, as the Koch project is still unfolding, the upper Midwest as well.
The south has made sense for using as a cheap labor pool. After all, it fought a horrendous war using poor laborers that were defending an economic system to keep them poor. Except for the farm revolts and cigar worker strikes I can't think of much labor solidarity in the south. I do recall a more negative attitude towards unions while living there so you may be right on resentments helping pass 'right to work' anti labor organizing laws.
The Democratic Party is incapable of reforming itsrlf and making a left turn. It's only going to happen with pressure from below. You don't get left policies by electing republicans in a Democat wrapper such as Beto. His voting record is what's wrong with the party and voters that can't differentiate between public relations and voting/donation history.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/27/18 02:38 PM)

Top
#310036 - 12/27/18 06:54 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
C'mon...Beto's no Republican in sheep's clothes. He's not racist, fascist, or fundamental Christian. Bear in mind that Joe Biden is more or less the front-runner in early polling. Pretty much as centrist as they come and as old as dirt. Bernie, the closest thing we have to a Comrade in the U.S. government, was running a close second.

Beto came in a distant third. But I think you're writing him off a bit too soon. His congressional voting record isn't impressive, I'll agree, but there is more to a man than that. Let's just say that if Trump gets his wall built...President Beto will tear it down. He likes brown people, he grew up with brown people, he speaks fluent Spanish and he represents a majority Latino district on the southern border. That alone puts a wee smile on my face. He'd be a great champion for immigration reform, something that's going to be a major issue in 2020.

Deal is...Beto could win this. You can set yourself against him for no good reason, or you could keep an open mind and see how things play out. He's not a leftist firebrand but he doesn't hate on leftist firebrands and he can see which way the political winds are blowing.
(Which is currently in favor of leftist firebrands)
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310038 - 12/27/18 09:20 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
I blame Ronald Reagan: He was President of the Screen Actor's Guild union for many years, and then a union-buster when he was President of the US. That was the point that even non-corrupt unions really started declining. Now we are living in an age of stagnant wages but continuing inflation. No wonder working class people in the Midwest are willing to try anything: Compared to 30 years ago, all the wisdom about working at a job and steadily getting raises until you retire with a pension, is no longer true. Instead you work when you can, at steadily crappier jobs for less money. Then you retire when you can't work anymore, and try to get by on Social Security. Eventually, you have to decide if you want cat food or your prescriptions.

It's The Conservative Dream (as opposed to The American Dream). Only it isn't you that is dreaming: It's some rich folks whose ideas of success all depend on lots of other people failing.

Top
#310050 - 12/28/18 02:03 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Beto could win. It would be a disaster for the Democrats. Another Clinton 2.0 and he's getting backed by the same groups. Third Way and New Democrats. That is not a good sign.
He's voted for way to much GOP legislation. Beyond the norm for someone in a democratic district such as his.
You might have a point that Beto is no Trump republican but it sure looks like he's a never Trumper in a democratic wrapper
He's recieved more fossil fuel money than everyone in congress but Ted Cruz. Awkward...

Sirota's deep dive into Beto was met with the usual attacks from the Clinton crowd and the corporate Democrats. That's also not a good sign. We don't need another democrat that talks from the left but governs from the right. Full article here

I would like to see a leftist elected for once and see if the corporatists can get him/her to move towards the center.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/28/18 02:07 AM)

Top
#310051 - 12/28/18 03:50 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

I would like to see a leftist elected for once and see if the corporatists can get him/her to move towards the center.


Get them into the party and pull the trigger. Chances are they will win.

If that is not the game then the thread needs to morph into a realistic discussion about how to make a third party candidate win the White House for the first time in history.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310052 - 12/28/18 11:14 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Yeah, that's going to happen...if Jesus comes back and runs Third Party for President.

Top
#310056 - 12/28/18 02:25 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

I would like to see a leftist elected for once and see if the corporatists can get him/her to move towards the center.


Get them into the party and pull the trigger. Chances are they will win.

If that is not the game then the thread needs to morph into a realistic discussion about how to make a third party candidate win the White House for the first time in history.


With the DNC, DCCC, DLC, DSCC, etc, working against left wing candidates it might be easier to run a third party. This wouldn't be ideal but it is the reality. The party has been run by corporations and Ivy League for so long that it views leftist politicians as a threat. At some point, more and more people are realizing they don't have a home in club democrat.
I don't think were there yet. A few more cycles of self interested policies and waffling on populist promises perhaps.
The demographics are favoring a left turn. I see no sign that the corporate smart set is willing to embrace this shift, preferring marginalizing that potential base instead.

Top
#310058 - 12/28/18 08:13 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Duuuuuhhhhhhh............ okay

I might have to take back some of my pessimism. I remain guarded because it's the DNC were talking about here but it looks like a step in the right direction for once.

Wait and see...

Top
#310059 - 12/28/18 08:18 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle


With the DNC, DCCC, DLC, DSCC, etc, working against left wing candidates it might be easier to run a third party.


Easier...why is "easy" a criteria? It might be easy but is there any historical data that supports the possibility of a WIN?
NO, THERE ISN'T.

If there had been at least three or four third party presidential administrations in the last eighty to 100 years I could be convinced it was possible. There's zero.

We will not survive another two, three or four Republican trifectas. We won't even survive one more. We will wind up living in the Holy American Empire, ruled by a "pastor" who is actually a former jack-leg preacher turned common crook, and Dominionism will be the official state religion, liberalism will be outlawed and you will get to vote for the fascist of your choice...if you are a white Christian property owning hetero male with sufficient wealth to qualify as a voter.

Internal passports between our various polluted "sovereign states" will be permitted only if a "constitutional sheriff" clears you for passage, and your kids will be educated by theocratic revisionists.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310060 - 12/28/18 08:21 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Duuuuuhhhhhhh............ okay

I might have to take back some of my pessimism. I remain guarded because it's the DNC were talking about here but it looks like a step in the right direction for once.

Wait and see...


This is precisely the kind of crowdfunding Bernie shocked the world with. The only remaining factor is whether or not he finally decides to join the party instead of remaining an outsider.
They've left the door open and the light on.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310061 - 12/28/18 09:08 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Why is declaring himself a democrat critical Jeff? There was plenty of Data that supported the notion that Sanders would have won in 2016.
No one would have predicted a busted out game show host having multiple trophy wives, a record of draft dodging, adultery and scams would be elected by evangelicals, vets and middle class boomer white guys and their wives but here we are.
You know what? The Democratic party blew it by throwing it for the establishment.
Anyhow, the Bernie vs. Clinton debate is an unwinnable war. What's amazing to me is the admission of the DNC that popular candidates might just win elections over well funded ones as Trump proved.



Edited by chunkstyle (12/28/18 11:18 PM)

Top
#310062 - 12/29/18 01:21 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Why is declaring himself a democrat critical Jeff?



Chunks, I'm pretty sure that you and I went over this ground more than a few times already. The two major political parties will NEVER lend support to someone who is "running as", they will only ever lend support to an actual party member, and "running as" is the equivalent of a third party, because the two major parties will always protect and defend candidates who ARE party members, and third party candidates have never won a POTUS election.

I didn't design it this way, but that is how it works.
I didn't say it was a great system, but that is the system.

Surely you remember us going over this before.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310064 - 12/29/18 02:09 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Yeah, I remember it. I didn't agree with that line of your reasoning then and I don't now. If it was designed that way then what kind of stupidity was it that the party didn't tell that to the Sanders camp and allowed him to run. You remember that there was also other Democratic candidates running as well, don't you?
Your argument of the Clinton grift with the party is reasonable and justifiable but doesn't square with the that overlooked fact. It does provide some kind of rational for the back room dealing between the DNC and the Clinton Campaign after it was revealed to the public.
What does the rules say about the other democratic candidates getting rooked in the 2016 race?....
I personally want to see Sanders run without bending the knee to club Dem. Make em' kick him out of the race.

Trump for the win 2020.

Let's get to the end of neoliberalisms facist inevitability. Hillary Trump. Cancer, heart attack. In the end, the results the same.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/29/18 04:51 AM)

Top
#310069 - 12/29/18 03:01 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
If it was designed that way then what kind of stupidity was it that the party didn't tell that to the Sanders camp and allowed him to run.


It's not like they could stop him from running...from "running as if".

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

You remember that there was also other Democratic candidates running as well, don't you?
Your argument of the Clinton grift with the party is reasonable and justifiable...


You're saying that you remember our past conversations but I wonder if you do, because you surely would remember that I took special care to emphasize my awareness of the fact that some of what they did might be illegal, and most of what they did was immoral.
So, remembering my position, you would agree that I saw it as neither reasonable nor justifiable. I only said that I understood why they reacted as they did, I wasn't surprised, only at the level to which they took it.

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

...but doesn't square with the that overlooked fact.


Well yeah, it kinda does.

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

It does provide some kind of rational for the back room dealing between the DNC and the Clinton Campaign after it was revealed to the public.
What does the rules say about the other democratic candidates getting rooked in the 2016 race?....


Pretty much the same thing. Both parties are going to select party members as potential candidates but in the end, once they have made their top picks, it becomes a beauty contest. With the Dems, that was a very distorted beauty contest. There is no dispute there.
But with Bernie, he hadn't even entered the beauty contest, not the DNC one.

Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

I personally want to see Sanders run without bending the knee to club Dem. Make em' kick him out of the race.

Trump for the win 2020.


Wow, I just don't know what to say to respond to "Trump for the win, 2020."
I'm glad that you're able to insulate yourself from the consequences of that possibility.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310071 - 12/29/18 06:24 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
O.K. jeff,
You win. Primaries don't matter in either a presidential election nor down ballot races. It's the party apparatus that gets to pick the winner. That would include the media arm of the party as well, no?
If that is the case, and i understand your simply observing and reporting, then what does that say?
Well one thing is the Republican party would appear to be the more democratic party. They did not want Trump to be the winner but got him all the same. Nor do they interfere in down ballot races to the extent that the Democratic party has. Witness the tea party's rise.
But again, it's all stupid and nothing matters. The Democratic party has got a rule somewhere that allows that rigging to take place should there be a challenge from an "as a"? They just didn't have a rule that barred Sanders entry into the presidential primary to begin with?
I'm glad the party apparatus gets to pick the winners for us. Now I know that my vote as well as yours doesn't count after all. The 2016 primary has taught a great many people a lesson in how ineffectual your voting will be should it not correspond to the parties pre-selected winner of the no-contest primary. Primaries are simply televised and reported publicity campaigns with the outcome predetermined by the party apparatus.

You think you've insulated yourself from Neoliberalism?
Trump has sped up the progression is all. Clinton was another mile marker on our way to a Trump like figure. We have long ago abandoned a project of 'We' to a dystopian reality of 'Me' society. Trump is the perfect distillation of a 'Me' authoritarian. Where else was neoliberalism going to go but here?


Edited by chunkstyle (12/29/18 06:31 PM)

Top
#310072 - 12/29/18 06:39 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Jim Webb, Martin O'Malley, Lincoln Chafee and Lawrence Lessig were all in on the fix, too?

Top
#310076 - 12/29/18 08:04 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
Let's ignore all the revisionist history going on here and get back to the topic, shall we? With 2019 coming fast, announcements are going to start being made. Julian Castro will be in, along with fellow Texan, Beto O'Rourke; probably Bernie and Biden; I expect Cuomo and Bloomberg, with Gillibrand filling out the New York contingent; then Corey Booker from across the river; maybe some Midwesterners, like Klobuchar and Hickenlooper; and from the West, Inslee. Who else to round out the score?

Top
#310080 - 12/29/18 08:49 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle


You think you've insulated yourself from Neoliberalism?


Not at all. And I have failed to be able to insulate myself from Trumpism, too.
My wife's illness is such now that, together with my vision problems, I am pretty much retired against my will. I mean, even if my eyes weren't going bad, it's damn hard to get much work because Karen needs a lot more supervision now than she did ten years ago. I can't leave town for more than a day, really.

So the little I pull in from DVD sales is all I am making now, together with Karen's VA money. I am three years away from collecting Social Security, and the only other income I am making is part of the monthly rent from one tenant. And that has been iffy for the last six months because of tenant problems. I've actually lost money a few months. And if the economy tanks, I'll lose even more if my current tenant gets screwed over.

So we are pretty vulnerable and have been for the last two or three years.

Sorry, we cannot afford another Trump term in the White House, there is no way in Hell we can survive it.
And we're nowhere near as vulnerable as a lot of others.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310081 - 12/29/18 09:34 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2319
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Here is a bit of wishful thinking. PBS decides to allot 2 hours of prime time to them running for public office, either side. To avail the candidate must agree to stand in front of a mike and camera and explain why he/she is the best candidate to vote for. Another situation might be for one candidate to challenge another candidate to a debate. In that case pre-defined judges would be assigned and the winner of the debate announced (unless it was a draw).

I also wouldn't mind a situation wherein the candidate is questioned by, say, a group of 4 persons (two to each side)

I see no sense in a debate between 20/30 candidates at a time.

TV is the right place, other than door belling. PBS is supported by gov and this would be payback. I remember when ALL tv stations did public announcements and services (one of which was the news). Too bad public services can't return to the good old days. I know, some stations do some public services. I would prefer that public services be pre-announced, and explained.

Once the PBS thing got into high gear the next thing would be to disallow any spending on elections and PBS would offer exposure to all viable candidates. ("viable" to be defined)

Whilst at it I might also suggest that the Dems start working on 'fixing' stuff. Is there any reason, for instance, that we have a federal flood insurance that is paying to rebuild seaside homes of the rich that get flooded every year. They have made runs at restricting insurance when that to be insured is also sure to get flooded year after year.

How about the Dems actually passing a law that would force INDIVIDUALS to put their names on any and all political ads (print, tv, whatever) they pay or or sponsor. Last time they tried the unions fought them tooth and nail. Apparently the unions didn't want to be associated with some of their political ads. This is also true of the donor class in general.

The Dems should pick specific actual problems, that they plan on attacking and solving. No generalities (like: for folks of different color, for children, for food, against murder and mayhem, rape and pillaging, etc) but specific stuff that effects everybody.

Top
#310082 - 12/29/18 10:02 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Whats revisionist NWP?

Ojeda from W.V.

Well Jeff, your situation is not that different from a lot of others including myself. You and your wife's value in society is only as much as you are able to earn in the marketplace. When I can no longer produce I will no longer hold much value either. You are no longer a profitable position of the yield curve in neoliberal marketworld.
I don't like it and find neoliberal politics odious and sociopathic but here we are. It's the market above everything and 'there is no other way' so don't even bring up other ideas. Ideas such as Sanders raised.

My guess is another neoliberal Dollar Bill Clinton play with Beto. He's telegenic and has been a mostly empty vessel of positions and his 'Beto for Texas' campaign website ( Still up) literally drips of neoliberal jingoism.
His vote record is being examined and the push back (mainly aimed at Sanders supporters) by the neolibs and the media has been fierce. This indicates to me that he is the next 'anointed' one.
Bill Gates News coverage of Sanders supporters war on Beto

Note the article never talks about the actual critique any voter, never mind Sanders supporters, might have for Beto's vote. The framing is all about their being a 'war' with an aggressor and a victim....
You've been in the creative field Jeff. What does it mean when a fair critique is seen as an act of war?
Signs are pointing to Beto getting picked for us groundlings to vote for in 2020.
Hillary's still a stalking horse. The recent meltdown of Goldman's Malaysian scam and the possible embarrassment for who knows who in this country, as the scandal risks spreading here, has the possibility of damaging her more than her speaking fees to the Boardroom. Something to keep an eye on. I can see money sloshing around in the charity world to keep that story from blowing up.





Edited by chunkstyle (12/29/18 10:07 PM)

Top
#310083 - 12/29/18 10:23 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
JGW,
I agree with most of what you say. I liked the League of Women Voters conducting the debates back before we let the political corporations decide between themselves how the debates would be run. I say 'give it back to the ladies'.
I think the politicians should be decked out like NASCAR. The larger the donation the bigger and better placed the corporate logo patch on their suit.

Sanders has given a clear 10 point plan that he outlined in the Op-Ed of the Washington Post on Thanksgiving. You can read about it here

Oddly, I could not link the the actual op-ed piece from the Washington Post itself. Seems to have disappeared.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/29/18 10:23 PM)

Top
#310084 - 12/29/18 10:28 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

You've been in the creative field Jeff. What does it mean when a fair critique is seen as an act of war?



It means, if it bleeds, it leads, same old same old.
That's why the PBS idea is an idea whose time has come, because PBS still gets taxpayer money and is therefore the appropriate vehicle, along with at least ONE of the C-SPAN channels. Thereafter, campaigning material needs to eventually be restricted to those outlets. The regular news media can continue to cover issues raised by the candidates.

We have to move in the direction of taxpayer funded and regulated campaigning and away from organized money, and that's going to require a reversal of some recent rulings, so it will be very tough.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310085 - 12/29/18 10:42 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
No one's bothered by the amount of 'charitable' contributions that are taken in by PBS? Koch's? Gates?
Just asking because their has been some whiff of scandal from that direction.

Top
#310086 - 12/30/18 02:10 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
No one's bothered by the amount of 'charitable' contributions that are taken in by PBS? Koch's? Gates?
Just asking because their has been some whiff of scandal from that direction.


Understood. PBS has been beggared thanks to Republicans and their death by a thousand cuts campaign against public funding. Maybe we Americans can work to restore the network to full public funding again thus negating the need for them to go begging to oligarchs.

It only works if we have the stomach for it and the political will to make it happen.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310087 - 12/30/18 04:57 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
It's the party apparatus that gets to pick the winner. That would include the media arm of the party as well, no?


It's not the party apparatus at all. It is Our Corporate Overlords™

They own both parties and the propaganda machine. In 2016 they chose Hillary Clinton and ran her against a racist assh*le. No way she could lose. She lost.

Hilly was s'posed to be president. Worldwide markets would have remained stable, The ACA would be getting shored up, we'd be seeing incremental change for the better. Capitalism would continue to lurch from crisis to crisis but would still reign supreme. The rich get richer and the poor stay poor.

2016 was a finger in their eye.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310089 - 12/30/18 02:36 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Except things have been getting incrementally worse for decades now on every front.
Aside from a growing cottage industry of 'no actually, it's really getting better' writers and pundits, by most measures it's getting worse.
On reflection, there was only two candidates that spoke to that situation. One is in the White House and the other is still working like a Roman to fix what he can.
I didn't agree with the formers empty promises and sh!t talk. He did, though, speak to much of the economic pain and destruction that global capitalism has brought. Again, much like Sanders.
One party let the process play out as they had no real way to but the brakes on him. The other party rigged the primary away from the populist candidate, having undemocratically preselected the winner and went on to lose. Theirs something tragically funny in all this and yet I fear it will play out all over in 2020.
Face it, it's the candidate that can deliver the most compelling vision for the future will have the best chance. The voters are not happy in neoliberal market land anymore. They want change that Corporate won't allow. I don't think incrementalism is going to cut it. Its a time for bold policy. Trumps bold. Sanders bold. The rest of the field... Meh.
I'm hoping there is a bold enough candidate to come forward and offer solutions for the problems facing America beyond colledge towns. Having some kind of grass roots qualifications is a suprising proposal coming from such a bankrupt and corrupted organization as the DNC.
What should have been an obvious lesson of Trumps election (bold ideas, if phoney, with small dollar donations, grass roots mobilization) has been lost by the usual scapegoating, redirecting, finger pointing and doubling down.
I don't believe the midterm blue wave was accomplished as much by party competency (remember the fortune poured in the Georgia special election with Ossof that lost large compared to the squeaker in Oklahoma the party chose to ignore?) as it was by counter forces generated by the POTUS and his majority.
My guess is the democrat party have to go bold and trust the voters to pick the winner. The corporate centrists have proven out if touch and incompetent in 2016. Let's hope they are restrained in some way and aren't allowed to pick the candidate in 2020.


Edited by chunkstyle (12/30/18 03:00 PM)

Top
#310092 - 12/30/18 05:58 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
the democrat party have to go bold and trust the voters to pick the winner


We've got upwards of fifty people threatening to throw their hats in the ring. The press will publish stories about all of them, judge the reactions and favor those who get the most clicks/views/buys with more stories.

The action right now favors Bernie and Beto, Socialist vs Capitalist.

Berniebots(Socialists) are getting in some early blows to try and knock Beto out before the race starts. Beto may be progressive but he's a capitalist. All capitalists are the enemy, regardless of party.

Quote:
things have been getting incrementally worse for decades now on every front.

No, they aren't. The ACA has led us to a place where Medicare For All might become a reality. Gay rights have made remarkable strides. An increased federal minimum wage hike is on the horizon and is becoming a reality in many cities and states. Free college tuition and student loan reform has entered mainstream political discussion and is becoming a reality in many nations as they realize that an educated populace is the key to the future.

I see a democratic sweep coming in 2020. And I think, despite sustained attacks by the socialists, his is the name most likely to catch fire among liberal and progressive(capitalist) voters.

We seldom hear much about Bernie's many and glaring weaknesses were he to become president. He has no interest in race and gender issues. He has no interest in foreign policy or diplomacy. He has a deep understanding of a handful of domestic economic issues and beyond that he's pretty much an empty suit. We owe a lot to Bernie but I don't think we owe him the Presidency. Any more than we owed it to Clinton.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310099 - 12/30/18 08:27 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
My hope is that the field gets whittled quickly, and that the candidates spend as little effort as possible trying to destroy each other, rather than presenting positive ideas. Bernie-ites are already trying that with O'Rourke, and deceptively, too. That does not bode well for the actual party (which Senator Sanders is not a member of). It's ironic, yet unsurprising, that the most vociferous (and disingenuous) Bernie defenders aren't even Democrats, either. Why the Bernie Movement Must Crush Beto O’Rourke (Jonathan Chait, New York Magazine)

And, Chait notes, Beto's critics don't represent most Democrats; they don't even represent typical Bernie voters. They are the most left of the left-wing supporters. The threat that they see O'Rourke poses is that a) he is too "mainstream", and b) he does a better job speaking to minorities and women, and might engage the Obama coalition.

Personally, I think Booker and Harris are the greater threat to Sanders voters. They just can't see that yet. What most Beenie voters don't notice is that Bernie won whites, but not women and minorities. O'Rourke can do both, which is why he is a threat.

Top
#310103 - 12/30/18 10:33 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Beto's critics don't represent most Democrats; they don't even represent typical Bernie voters. They are the most left of the left-wing


And they use the word "neoliberal" a lot. Because paleoliberals were somehow socialists like themselves....

Not that there's anything wrong with socialists. I want to live in a socialist world where everyone is housed, clothed, and fed. A world where the ambitious can grow rich and surround themselves with luxury, and where the artists and hippies can lay around and smoke weed and the regular people in between can get nice jobs to buy nice houses and cars.
A world where war isn't necessary or desirable and everyone just gets along famously with each other because who cares what god you pray to or what sex you want to be or who you want to f*ck. A world where it doesn't matter what color your skin is or what side of what border you were born on.

You know...a socialist utopia.

From each, according to his abilities, and to each, according to his needs.

It's coming, but not in 2020. I'm already calling the race for Beto.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310104 - 12/30/18 11:41 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Wages have stalled out for decades.
We've killed hundreds of thousands of people.
We imprison more people per capita than any other country.
We pay more than all other developed countries for health care.
Infant mortalility is high.
U.S. Lifespans are declining.
Gun deaths are increasing
Cost of housing as percentage of wages at historic high.
Household debt is increasing.

etc, etc,

But we got gay marriages and transgender bathrooms. so I guess s'all good.
The rest of the conversation getting injected with progressive ideas came primarily from Sanders campaign. Yes a socialist.

But your right Gregor. Your characterization of socialism has brought me back to reality. I was foolish to think things are getting bad. That neoliberalism has proven to be a fraud and yet another Ivy League grift for white collar criminals to explain their grift as 'the only way'.

Things are indeed better. Just hop in the car and drive in any direction and the evidence is all around for me to see.



Edited by chunkstyle (12/31/18 12:13 AM)

Top
#310105 - 12/31/18 12:01 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Beto is the the favorite. He has the young 'executive model' look about him.
The phoney framing that keeps oozing into the mainstream corporate media of a war getting waged by Sanders supporters is absurd but not unexpected. I remember all the misogynistic 'Bernie Bro' Sh!t talk coming from various Clinton friendly media. Same play.
Jonathan Chait is one of those morons, like Bill Crystall, that continues to be wrong on most subjects that these corporate funded co called public intellectuals are famous for. His gulf war support, reasoning and defense of his reasoning is a constant theme writing and is worth anyone's time to read before taking his opinion or political characterization seriously. His other theme is pearl clutching over his understanding of Marx. Spoiler alert: It's bad.

When I rail about the stupidity of the freaks and morons involved in flying the plane into the mountain in 2016 and yet somehow crawl out of the smoking crater offering more stupid analysis and somehow keep their high salaried jobs, Jonathan Chait is the type I have in mind. His position on the Gulf War disqualifies him as a serious intellectual. That's not an attack of a Sanders supporter but a critique of Chiat. See the difference? No?

He's also a scab at the New Yorker but that might not matter much for most here.

But here we have it. Beto is unquestionably good. Don't ask to see his voting record and worse yet, express an opinion on it. To do so makes you a dupe of the Marxist Utopian peddling pretender Sanders, a fanatic or both.

The Dem neoliberal's have their man. It's looking like 2016 all over again. A neoliberal in a progressive wrapper against a New Deal democrat in a Democratic Socialist wrapper.




Edited by chunkstyle (12/31/18 12:06 AM)

Top
#310107 - 12/31/18 11:55 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
An interesting article of this relentless media trolling of Sanders supporters :

"There’s nothing that our party needs less than a relitigation of 2016. But it’s important to say that Sanders was a protest candidate: a septuagenarian left-winger from a small state, he was the kind of candidate who usually gets 5%. Instead, he got 42%.

It’s worth asking why he did so well, without getting into the personal terms that so often have animated this question. And if I could offer a single reason, it is that a huge part of the party, nearly half, did not like being told whom to vote for… ."

Full article

Top
#310111 - 12/31/18 02:26 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
Ring, meet hat. Elizabeth Warren launches 2020 presidential exploratory committee (nbc) First announcement, and it's not even 2019 yet!

Top
#310117 - 12/31/18 10:26 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
You could do worse than Warren. She won't be a darling of the big money boys on Wall St. Win or lose, I'd welcome having her voice in the debates and the issues she's sure to raise. Might even say the "P" word.

Top
#310118 - 01/01/19 12:05 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Sadly, she fails in charisma and oratorical skills. I just don't foresee her generating a lot of excitement among voters. She's a bean counter and a regulator, great at what she does but do I want her running the country...?
Better than Trump by far so there's that.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310120 - 01/01/19 12:38 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Hafta agree with you there Gregor. She's not a real live wire or has any Clash references but I'm glad she'll lend a voice to sanders and, more importantly, push ideas instead if product or treat the primary like a brand roll out.
She's no friend of Big Mo so that's a good thing and should make her arguments more genuine.
Holy moley, imagine! The democrats having big ideas for big problems. It would be a nice change from selling Republican with Zero Calories.


Edited by chunkstyle (01/01/19 12:39 AM)

Top
#310124 - 01/01/19 05:43 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
She'll introduce a few ideas that will catch the public interest and be picked up by the other candidates including the ultimate future president. So it'll be worth having her in the race even if she doesn't make it out of Iowa.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310125 - 01/01/19 08:27 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
It should be open to either gender and any race, but I suspect the Democrats should run a White man to get all the misogynistic (men AND women) and secret racists on board. I think there are a lot of both and they may not even realize they are. But in 2016 a lot of White women voted against Hillary and I think it comes down to many women not trusting other women because subconsciously they see them as rivals. Now with Trump in charge, a lot of misogyny and racism has been "allowed", or even encouraged.

Too bad we are not as good as we should be, because having a woman as President would probably be a great improvement.

Top
#310127 - 01/02/19 12:14 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: pondering_it_all]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I think that's how it's gonna turn out this time around anyway, PIA, we had a black guy for two terms and ran a woman last time, the Democratic Party is not entirely made up of POC and women nor is it mandatory for them to run non-white and non-male candidates just to prove that they are more diverse than the Republicans.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310142 - 01/02/19 07:01 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Were gunna need a bigger car......

The left coast inna house!

Top
#310164 - 01/03/19 10:03 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California


Good-bye Bernie

(Originally published on Facebook)
JEFFERY HAAS·WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 2, 2019

I've probably exhausted every available Bernie thread on the internet lately to say the same thing...

When Bernie was a young man, doing carpentry and odd jobs, and giving the occasional impassioned speech or doing the occasional sit-in, social democracy or democratic socialism was a very romantic thing for an intellectual Jewish transplant from Brooklyn to do in the wilds of Vermont.

Imagine it for a moment...



Your young bespectacled sweaty face plastered across the front page of the local paper, taking the town of Burlington by storm, your impassioned rhetoric swelling the bosoms of erudite young coeds, winning the local election and trying to make good on a few erstwhile and yet earnest entreaties to fair wages and decently affordable tuition.

Yep, democratic socialism or social democracy, whichever it was, must have been a huge rush for the young Bernie Sanders, because for a guy like that, being a regular old Democrat in 1971 meant you were a lot more like the past candidates of the Democratic Party, which meant you were a lot more like Hubert Humphrey or George McGovern, which meant that you were like one of the guys who lost to Richard Milhous Nixon. It meant that you were like one of the establishment, and in early 1970's Vermont, where it was still very much The Sixties, that wasn't something you wanted to be.

The fact is, Bernie Sanders stopped being a social democrat or democratic socialist the day he first set foot on Capitol Hill.
It's not because he became a sellout or a hypocrite, it's because the Democratic Socialists of America have never allowed themselves to field candidates for the House, the Senate or the White House. It's just not in their DNA for some reason.

And as you might want to point out, Bernie has been an FDR style liberal New Deal Democrat his entire life in the House and Senate.
That is what he is. But Bernie clings to old romantic notions and sentimental trappings.

A lot of ex-hippies underwent much more radical transformations, and found themselves on Wall Street as financial consultants, or in Silicon Valley, or in the halls of neocon think tanks the way former campus radical Elliot Abrams did.

And yet despite their three piece suits, many of them left one tiny tuft of long hair tucked under their collar to remind them every so often that they can still "let their freak flag fly".
They still want to be nonconformist, just not in a threatening or scary way.

And for Bernie, refusing to join the Democratic Party and running around pronouncing himself a democratic socialist means that he can tell himself that he's still the brash iconoclastic non-conformist...and not a sentimental old fool, because only a sentimental old fool would pass up repeated opportunities to completely overturn and rebuild the Democratic Party in his own image, literally making the DNC "HIS BITCH".

And if anyone doubts that is possible, I might remind them that Mr. Sanders raised almost 300 million dollars with zero corporate funding, purely through grass roots techniques at a time when everyone else said it was impossible.

Flipping the DNC and making the party his own would have been a walk in the park, given his considerable mojo and charisma, and given the fact that he could have started the effort all the way back in 2008, after another young and brash nonconformist with the funny name of Barack Hussein Obama did much the same to Hillary Clinton.
And had he bothered to do so, Bernie Sanders would have BEEN the Democratic candidate for POTUS in 2016 and Hillary would have been munching on popcorn in upstate New York.

And Donald Trump would have been a minor footnote in history, because Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders would have won by a landslide.

So, as much as I love Bernie Sanders, I am forced to reckon with the fact that Bernie, despite some of his good ideas, is a sentimental old fool. And I voted for him and supported him right from the very first day he announced, so this is not a hate piece against him, it is more of a mournful revelation about what might have been and was not meant to be, all because of the need to cling to silly notions of the past, which is what we must stop doing if we intend to win in 2020.

Good-bye Bernie.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310168 - 01/03/19 12:08 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Obvious trolling.
Bernie understands politics. Populist politics.
Hillary did not.
Obama did but, as Trump learned from, it can be phoney and you can get away with it.
The Democratic Party is a party of the top 10%. The credentialed class. Lanyard People in today's economy. All they do is talk about 'access to' or 'opportunities for'. The language is easy to spot. Always indirect. Always some vague meriticratic language with inevitable means testing limitations.
Democrats have been the party of the credentialed professional class. The technocrats. They hate populism and have a disdain for the working class. They went to the right schools, made the right career choices, made the right life choices. They're exemplars of meritocracy.
They're also hawkish. Eternally trying to pick up votes from the right wing by running Vets and military officers as some kind of bona fides on their willingness to use state violence. To prove they have balls to the mythical moderate republicans and to signal to the world their foriegn policy approach.
Economically they are neoliberal. Pathologically preferring a 'market' oriented solution to social problems. A tax incentive as opposed to direct action thru the state with most of the benefits accruing to their 10% constituents, austerity and harsh disciplining for the rest. They brought about the largest incarceration system the world has seen and militarized the police force to enforce imposed order on the swollen working class and poor.
They treat politics as a brandind exercise and product rollout. Always trying to come up with the right and necessary ingredients of aspirational tone and a smattering of rhetoric borrowed from the left, with an appropriate dose of virtue signaling to the right and donor class. All left oriented talk is forgotten once elected.
It was not nor should it be Sanders job to reform the Democratic Party. That's not politics nor how it works, is not possible to do and is a red herring you've concocted Jeff. Instead Sanders gave voters alternative rather than embarking on some kind of mythical internal party identity loyalty and some kind of follow on reform criteria you insist must be met. Much easier and effective to offer a viable alternative to the self reinforcing party hierarchy. It sure wasn't the corporate takeover path Jeff, so where do you find evidence that it should be for the left?
In the end, Sanders addressed peoples material concerns with bold direct policy proposals. The establishment candidate, caught flat footed and unprepared for this political challenge and having nothing to counter with, reminiscent of her campaigns tactics with Obama, she fell back on dog whistles, scorn and back room dealing to clinch the nomination.
She went down to the Republican challenger who used a different and darker kind of populism. Phony populism to be sure but effective. What's ironic was the fact that the Republican Party, displaying far more democratic tendencies within it, allowed the democratic nominating process play out regardless of the outcome. Centrists Dems will never admit to this nor condemn the corruption within uthe very undemocratic Drmocratic party. Sadly ironic and one wonders how much pearl clutching and Muellar investigation hyperventilating would be going on right now if it was found out that POTUS had engaged in similar financial skulduggery with the RNC before the election.
What's telling is the willfull ability of the Democratic Party to not learn. They have committed themselves to neoliberalism and are not going back to the politics of their parents. They helped dismantle the New Deal and are not looking back nor questioning the wisdom of doing so. They represent the lanyards. The self described creative class, the 'innovators' and entrepreneurs. They have turned their backs on the losers of this Chicago economy. Labor, working class, minorities and the poor.
The hard right has been stripping them off for decades while the lanyards have been showing them the door.
It would not be possible to reform these greed heads Jeff. It not Sanders job. Your insistance that Sanders tilt at windmills by bending the knee to the lanyards is a fallacy and serve no useful purpose. He has unleashed an awareness of a different kind of politics. One the party has largely spurned and, to its horror, has been found appealing with broad popular support. It turns out laissez faire economics sucks and austerity for most has a political down side.
Instead of embracing Sanders positions the party, from its recent actions, is looking to maintain its ideological grip and is looking for some kind of Sanders killer in the race for 2020. A combination of virtue signaling to Sanders base but ideologically committed to the Lanyards as Bill, Hillary and Obama.


Edited by chunkstyle (01/03/19 01:39 PM)

Top
#310169 - 01/03/19 02:37 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
In the interest of fair and balanced posting, let me also throw in an image of your champion as the left and right see it:












grin







Edited by chunkstyle (01/03/19 02:43 PM)

Top
#310176 - 01/03/19 08:10 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

It was not nor should it be Sanders job to reform the Democratic Party. That's not politics nor how it works, is not possible to do and is a red herring you've concocted Jeff. Instead Sanders gave voters alternative rather than embarking on some kind of mythical internal party identity loyalty and some kind of follow on reform criteria you insist must be met. Much easier and effective to offer a viable alternative to the self reinforcing party hierarchy. It sure wasn't the corporate takeover path Jeff, so where do you find evidence that it should be for the left?


So you're saying that it is not a candidate's job to RE-FORM a party, and yet what did Trump do? It's exactly what he did, it's exactly what the Tea Party did, and it's exactly what Roosevelt did in his time or do you actually believe that the Democrats of the Wilsonian era were similar to Roosevelt?

It is not possible to do? Talk about mythical, let's explore the mythical and the viable. What's mythical about third party POTUS electability, aside from damn near everything?
What's viable about an alternative that has not and cannot seem to win elections?

And please, just because you vehemently disagree with my prior essay, that doesn't mean it is trolling. I would never dream of labeling you a troll. Keep it classy.

I'll tell you what trolling is. It's plastering a picture of Hillary and labeling it "my champion" when I've clearly stated she was not.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310178 - 01/03/19 08:30 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2319
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
It just dawned on me that a LOT of the stuff being argued about has to do with privatization. Healthcare for all, for instance, is antithetical to privatization so is not deemed right for polite society. This is also true when discussing money in politics. What we have, right now, is a voting system completely in the grips of 'privatization'. As far as I can tell, the error seems to be in those things that should never be privatized. Some of those things are politics, war, healthcare, education, police, and firemen. When that stuff gets privatized then the only people who win are the very, very rich. They are the only ones who have the bucks to pay for the 'best'. Their schools are very good but grossly over priced. Same with their private police, doctors and even their political candidates.

I think what I am suggesting is that privatization has gone MUCH further than it should have a number of years ago and its continuing to this day as the very rich continue their onslaught on what should be free to citizens and provided by all citizens as part of the public good. The interesting thing is that the supposed members of the 'democratic socialists' are not supporting the socialization of this stuff so much as making the privatized stuff available to them that can't pay the bills for it. I find it all very strange. The fact that socializing stuff that everybody needs also means that everybody gets to pay for this stuff. For some unknown reason the 'democratic socialists' seem to believe that all this stuff falls from the skies which seems to me to be at least as bad as the privatization itself.

If you want healthcare for all then the 'all' has to be part of the solution - just not a bunch of 1 percenters. If, again for instance, healthcare will be provided for all then this means that, unless we are to be bankrupt in about 2 years, we need to take control of a bunch of greed businesses. Drugs and Healthcare machine producers come to mind. Basically, to provide healthcare for all the entire healthcare industry, lock stock and barrel, needs to be seriously either taken over and regulated. No more healthcare insurance, that's just an expense that we don't need anymore and the revolving door of the FDA goes away. Gov also continues to gather data and will have to also control just what healthcare does and is. In that regard they should regulate medical procedures based on outcomes. We currently have a system where there are a number of procedures that just don't work. (google "healthcare procedures that don't work" for a list of some of them)

What I am saying is that I think that most of the arguments are over stuff that makes no sense and are more distraction than anything else. Healthcare is consumed by the problems of having a system of healthcare for profit. THAT is the problem! All the rest is, basically, a distraction. Same with schools. In Washington state there is a school district that is out of money. They can't build, they they can't hire more teachers, they have no money. In the last election the PARENTS of the children, in the school system, didn't vote (something like 18% actually voted). People blame the school districts even though the voters (those actually in charge) could actually fix the problem if they actually voted. This is my reason that I think that voting should be mandatory. Seems that the voter in the U.S.A. just can't take time out, from their incredibly important lives, to do the basics and actually vote! This is, I think, a pretty basic problem and if we can't fix that one then all the rest is just a given, ie. we give up and depend on 'the lord' to make it all right (them who take care of themselves now only have myth value)

So, basically, we are a lazy people, unwilling to actually embrace any thought of being responsible for our own actions or lack thereof. If this doesn't get fixed I fear its all gonna come down around our heads.

Top
#310179 - 01/03/19 08:35 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Well Jeff I'm not sure what to make of it but a bespeckled sweaty faced transplant intellectual jew that is now a sentimental old fool kinda feels like trolling to a Sanders supporter but if that wasen't your intention then I apologize. Dog whistling?

It's amazing how relentless you are in condemning Sanders for his refusal to bend the knee or failing to remake the Democratic party in his own image.
No, it's not his responsibility. I don't even know what that means or what that would look like. Would he have to buy it with his 3oo million? Does he go Oprah with a 'you have a new car and YOU have a new car!'. Tell me what making the Democratic party a bitch looks like or mean.
It does divert coversation away from Sanders political position that's challenged the governing power for decades though. I don't know if that's your intention or not. Should any outside challenger remake a political party before running "as a"?

Franklin was a class traitor. A rare thing in politics from the top. He understood his people well and, I believe, knew how to manage them better than any democrat since. Opportunities were unique to his time but you could easily compare his administration to Obama's and draw your own comparison. Franklin didn't have a Gietner in his cabinet and hated Harvard men. It's remarkable how much he didn't allow bankers to craft economic policy. Not so with Obama.

Again, this centrist vs. socialist posting war is futile and can't be won. I really don't understand where your coming from with all the qualifiers you insist on from Sanders. You seldom talk of his record or ideas preferring credentialing and qualifying.




Edited by chunkstyle (01/03/19 08:40 PM)

Top
#310189 - 01/04/19 05:31 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle
Well Jeff I'm not sure what to make of it but a bespeckled sweaty faced transplant intellectual jew that is now a sentimental old fool kinda feels like trolling to a Sanders supporter but if that wasen't your intention then I apologize. Dog whistling?

It's amazing how relentless you are in condemning Sanders for his refusal to bend the knee or failing to remake the Democratic party in his own image.
No, it's not his responsibility. I don't even know what that means or what that would look like. Would he have to buy it with his 3oo million? Does he go Oprah with a 'you have a new car and YOU have a new car!'. Tell me what making the Democratic party a bitch looks like or mean.
It does divert coversation away from Sanders political position that's challenged the governing power for decades though. I don't know if that's your intention or not. Should any outside challenger remake a political party before running "as a"?

Franklin was a class traitor. A rare thing in politics from the top. He understood his people well and, I believe, knew how to manage them better than any democrat since. Opportunities were unique to his time but you could easily compare his administration to Obama's and draw your own comparison. Franklin didn't have a Gietner in his cabinet and hated Harvard men. It's remarkable how much he didn't allow bankers to craft economic policy. Not so with Obama.

Again, this centrist vs. socialist posting war is futile and can't be won. I really don't understand where your coming from with all the qualifiers you insist on from Sanders. You seldom talk of his record or ideas preferring credentialing and qualifying.




Fer chrissakes, as long as you continue to portray me as a centrist or a Hillary guy, there is no way you'll understand what I am getting at. Clearly if you insist that I am a centrist, or a neoliberal, or a Hillary supporter, everything I'm talking about won't make sense to you. It's as if you're somehow reading a heavily redacted version of my posts and responses, thus every time I talk about how I admire Bernie's ideas, you see giant black Sharpie squares covering my words.

Let me know if you can log on to the REAL Capitol Hill Blue page, because that censorship doohickey is making it impossible for me to communicate my ideas to you.

Or...is it just that you're averse to the notion that I simply am convinced that Bernie took the worst possible route? I can't tell if it's that or you're reading a Chinese version of the site with heavy censorship going on.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310192 - 01/04/19 01:56 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Ok Jeff, your a Sanders supporter and it's mainly styles of campaigning were disagreeing about.
If I understand you correctly, Sanders needed to make the party his Bitch for him to be the winner of 2016. Is that a correct assessment?
You've also, if not condoned the Clinton/DNC grift,dismissed it as a more or less 'hey, wadja expect? Bernie's not a democrat so alls fair... Correct?
Now there's a final analysis by you of Sanders political career starting from his mild man mannered youth in the rusticated hills of Vermont to his eventual nonconformist golden years resulting in his sentimental old fool status. Maybe I'm dense (and it wouldn't be the first time) but is this irony?
I'm not sure what it's for but my take away was Sanders made the critical flaw of not declaring himself a Democrat, remaking the party in his own image, then capping that accomplishment by running for President? Is that a fair summary or was the intention irony?

We could engage in that type of conversation or we could instead discuss and debate what he's actually doing. Now. As opposed to a mythical 'shoulda done'.
Like getting concessions out of multinationals to pay their U.S. Workers a living wage.
Hosting live video conferences on climate change, health care.
Creating a political campaign funding apparatus out of his own presidential campaign. 'Our Revolution'.
Hosting an international left wing convention to begin organizing on an international scale leftist ideas and opportunities. Recognizing the far right is way ahead here.
Introducing legislation for the passage of Medicare for all and making it a central feature in the mid terms.

Frankly, if you've been discussing these activities as well as others I've omitted and I didn't notice you have the, again, my apologies.
If your 'bye Bernie' was in the style of Jonathan Swift's Modest Proposal, I didn't catch it. All I keep reading is what Sanders should have done.


Edited by chunkstyle (01/04/19 02:12 PM)

Top
#310196 - 01/04/19 06:06 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: chunkstyle

We could engage in that type of conversation or we could instead discuss and debate what he's actually doing. Now. As opposed to a mythical 'shoulda done'.
Like getting concessions out of multinationals to pay their U.S. Workers a living wage.
Hosting live video conferences on climate change, health care.
Creating a political campaign funding apparatus out of his own presidential campaign. 'Our Revolution'.
Hosting an international left wing convention to begin organizing on an international scale leftist ideas and opportunities. Recognizing the far right is way ahead here.
Introducing legislation for the passage of Medicare for all and making it a central feature in the mid terms.

Frankly, if you've been discussing these activities as well as others I've omitted and I didn't notice you have the, again, my apologies.
If your 'bye Bernie' was in the style of Jonathan Swift's Modest Proposal, I didn't catch it. All I keep reading is what Sanders should have done.


I'm all for having the kind of conversation that illuminates what he HAS been doing since 2016 because (A) the man is not stupid, and (B) he has indeed been VERY busy.
And I've been watching, and applauding.

Our Revolution opened its doors and turned on the lights immediately after the 2016 debacle. And so far it has helped something like 100 or more candidates if you include all the down-line people in state and local politics. There may be even more that I wasn't aware of, but the point is, Our Revolution has been very busy.
More applause.

Yes Chunk, my ONLY issue is that the decision to stay outside the party was a poor judgment call, nothing else. I too thought the odds might be in his favor at the beginning but I too saw what the DNC did, and it's not a case of "what'd ya expect" as much as it is a case of (for me anyway) "Sigh, the more things change, the more they stay the same...or get worse".
I really had hoped that his candidacy would spark some tidal forces in the DNC and forced a deeper look at their rules. But as you pointed out, they'd already crowned Hillz as the Golden One before Bernie even announced and they'd already made up their minds.

Look at that bitch Debbie Wasserman Schultz. For me, just looking at who and what she is made me realize that Bernie was screwed, and there wasn't a damn thing anyone could do about it.

Believe me, both Karen and I were rooting for him all the way to the bitter end. I am only making that "sentimental old fool" comment because I'm still in shock that his own electoral apparatus wasn't out ahead of all this.
You have to have one of those close friends who is willing to tell you what you do not want to hear, and those close individuals should have told Bernie that running as an outsider would never force the DNC internal apparatus to move once Hillz had been crowned.

So, I am forced to come to that conclusion because it appears that Bernie took a very dangerous gamble. And for what? A label??

I don't know, Chunk...I just don't know and I don't understand.
But believe me, I am not a Hillary supporter, not for POTUS anyway.
I would have viewed her election (had she won) as "a survivable event" and as a "mediocre presidency" at best...better than Trump but not by much.

To paraphrase P.J. O'Rourke:
"Hillary is the second worst thing that could happen to this country."
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310201 - 01/04/19 09:54 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Interesting article about Elizabeth Warren's DNA test kerfluffle:

Mainstream Media Is Blowing Its Coverage Of Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test

It looks like maybe one Warren critic raised a stink about it, and every mainstream press article quotes him and a lot of Republicans who are piling on. But funny thing: Nobody bothered to ask any Native People chiefs or political leaders! They all pretty much support Warren because she has been so supportive of tribal interests in her career. Most of them are proud of their heritage and honor anyone who discovers their own Native ancestry.

I bet the only real objection anybody has to DNA comes from tribes that are kicking people out so the can boost their casino checks! They are afraid that DNA tests could admit more people to their tribe, but of course Warren is NOT claiming that at all. And now, because her test backs up her stories about her family history, it just makes all of Trump's mocking horribly racist!

Personally, I think her face does show some Native ancestry, but I'm quite familiar with mixed-race people's appearances. (Because I am one, and I'm married to one. smile )

Top
#310234 - 01/07/19 05:37 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Ok Jeff,
Just to show I'm not a Bernie fanatic, here's a very good article that has some excellent points to argue about his run in 2016 and likely 2020.
Still, all in all, hey may be the best of the barrel which may see the party go the way if the Whigs (as has been perpetually predicted for the Republican Party).
I can easily see a repeat if 2016 and all the hijinks leading to an alienated left not bothering to show up to vote.
Time will tell if we make it that far.

"As the MPP’s Nick Brana noted right after the 2018 mid-term elections, the contests ought to have been “a serious wake-up call for progressives” who dream of gaining power by taking over the Democratic Party. By Brana’s account, “The blue wave [was] a corporate wave that…swept in the same kind of Democratic politicians that drove working people into Donald Trump’s arms after eight years of Obama. When Democrats busy themselves serving the wealthy again, the result will be an even sharper lurch to the authoritarian right."

If Bernie runs.


Edited by chunkstyle (01/07/19 05:52 AM)

Top
#310237 - 01/07/19 06:12 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
I'm not a Bernie fanatic


No, you're a socialist, even Bernie is not really far enough left for you. I sympathize, I just don't see big social changes coming anytime soon or major rule or strategy changes within the Democratic Party to become more inclusive of the socialist agenda.

It's what I like to think of as reality.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310241 - 01/07/19 08:14 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Uhhhh O.K.,
Who's saying the Democrats are going to be embracing anything left of their current corporate positioning? I think I've already predicted a scenario where it's highly likely the Democratic Party will further alienate it's left and may lead to a split. My hope is that it does and is necessary for there to ba a space to open up and we have a real debate as the elections are getting scheduled into the time slots. Kinda already begun. Buckle up!
Over the last three years I'd be hard put to say anyone here has had a firm grip on what the emerging realities were going to be, including myself and your cracked crystal ball Gregor.



Edited by chunkstyle (01/07/19 08:17 PM)

Top
#310243 - 01/08/19 05:34 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Certainly no one predicted a Trump win in 2016.
Except maybe rporter314.

We'll see how me and my cracked crystal ball do on this Beto prediction.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310272 - 01/09/19 03:27 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Duly noted. You support the guy who supports the idea of supporting something.

grin

Top
#310273 - 01/09/19 05:35 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I don't necessarily support Beto. I just think he has an excellent chance of winning if he chooses to run.

There is no candidate, right, left, or center who I believe can accomplish anything of note. I will support and vote for whomever gets the Democratic nomination.

Kamala Harris, Sherrod Brown, and Elizabeth Warren are all okay by me.
Biden and Sanders not so much. Julian Castro and that black mayor from New Jersey who used to play ball or something need not apply.

It's all about charisma. Beto has it.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310274 - 01/09/19 05:44 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
I think I've already predicted a scenario where it's highly likely the Democratic Party will further alienate it's left and may lead to a split.


That's not so much a prediction as a hope for an eventual split so you can jump on the third party bandwagon.

The way things are actually looking is that lefties are getting elected by voters all over the place because demographics are trending leftward. The Democratic Party has not really begun to adjust yet but they will. Not enough to satisfy you, but enough to prevent an actual split. The socialization of capitalism is a slow and unsteady work in progress.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310278 - 01/09/19 10:26 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
"That's not so much a prediction as a hope for an eventual split so you can jump on the third party bandwagon."

Oh Hell Yeah!

Any force that releases us from the death grip of moldering, feckless political nihilism found in the composting Democratic party will be a welcome relief.
Party leadership has an instinctive will to kill off it's left. They have no ideas

Top
#310318 - 01/11/19 09:24 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Any force that releases us from the death grip of moldering, feckless political nihilism found in the composting Democratic party will be a welcome relief.


Maybe it would be. But it's not going to happen. The more likely scenario is that any split in the Democratic party simply gives over more power to Republicans.

But I don't think it's going to come to that. More and more Progressive Democrats and Democratic Socialists are going to get elected. Just as the TEA Party dragged the Republicans to the right, the progressives will drag Democrats to the left.

2020 baby! Things are gonna be changing for the better.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310420 - 01/17/19 10:46 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
"If you have strayed, all is forgiven, but you better come to Jesus right now because memory is long, and history judges the cowardly squish far more harshly than the honest enemy. And you can’t say that no one was there at the time to tell you that this was it—this was the pivotal moment where you had to make the right choice."

It's Bernie, B!tch

Top
#310421 - 01/18/19 12:09 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Hey, I'm okay with Bernie, if he gets nominated I'll be proud to vote for him. Just like last time.

It's his turn after all...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310430 - 01/18/19 05:51 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger
More and more Progressive Democrats and Democratic Socialists are going to get elected. Just as the TEA Party dragged the Republicans to the right, the progressives will drag Democrats to the left.


This is what I keep talking about. I've spent hours talking about this, here on CHB and elsewhere. The Tea Party and Freedom Caucus takeovers, and the Trump takeovers of the GOP are a blueprint on how it is done, and there is no reason why we can't simply use the same methodologies on our side.
It is cheap, it is effective and transformative, and as far as Bernie goes, if he sees the sea change in the party, maybe he will be smart enough to finally JOIN so that he can be more than just a write-in wet dream for Republicans.

Yeah Chunk, I know...you don't believe in it or believe it possible by any stretch.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310519 - 01/23/19 01:34 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (29, D-N.Y.), Max Rose (31, D-N.Y.), Haley Stevens (35, D-Mich.), Lauren Underwood (32, D-Ill.), Abby Finkenauer (30, D-Iowa), Ilhan Omar (37, D-Minn.) ... and 14 other freshman members of Congress, comprising one of the most diverse classes in United States history.

At the start of the 115th Congress in January 2017, there were just five millennials (individuals born between 1981 and 1996) in the House of Representatives. But as of January 2018, when the 116th Congress convened, there are 26. According to Pew, more than one-fifth of the 91 congressional freshmen are millennials, and two-thirds (14) of those representatives are Democrats.


Surely you've stopped by Huffpo and seen this article?

That's demographics at work.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310585 - 01/26/19 12:16 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560

Top
#310586 - 01/26/19 04:21 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
I didn't figure he'd make it to Iowa. He's a Republican, he'll find another way to attach himself to a government teat.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310599 - 01/27/19 01:56 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
I was under the impression he is a Democrat.

Yup, here he is, Richard Ojeda - Democrat. (albeit a "Conserv-a-Dem")
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310600 - 01/27/19 02:06 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
He's so principled he'll attach any label that furthers his career.

Top
#310604 - 01/27/19 06:19 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
He voted for Trump. That's really all I need to dismiss him as a principled candidate or a man that can be trusted to hold office.

It appears a bit of a hubbub is taking place around the Starbucks executive planning to run as an Independent. He aint got nuthin' the Democrats aint got and is likely to be ignored by voters.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310616 - 01/28/19 04:25 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
Nate Silver had this to say about Schultz...

Quote:
it’s unbelievably arrogant for Howard Schultz to think that ‘Howard Schultz, as an independent, on a platform of deficit reduction, for president’ is the answer to any question that anybody has ever asked about anything,”


He's also against healthcare reform...

This might be one of those Neoliberals I've heard about.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310644 - 01/30/19 10:58 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 8243
Loc: North San Diego County
Schultz talks about not being able to afford Medicare For All like everybody gets it for free. Currently we don't even get it for free when we turn 65, after a lifetime of paying in. People under 65 would be paying a lot more for coverage (to buy in to Medicare) than they would pay upon reaching 65. Nobody serious actually thinks Medicare For All means free National Health for everybody.

Moving toward that would be very gradual.

Top
#310645 - 01/30/19 04:50 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: pondering_it_all]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14596
Loc: Florida
It appears to me that Shultz feels that Billionaires are under-represented in the Democratic Party.

Quote:
"When I hear people espousing free government-paid college, free government-paid health care, and a free government job for everyone -- on top of a $21 trillion debt -- the question is, how are we paying for all this and not bankrupting the country?"


How, Howard? By taxing rich motherf*ckers like you, that's how.
No wonder he wants Democrats to lose...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#310650 - 01/30/19 07:20 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
I was, frankly, shocked at the "tin ear" responses of Bloomberg and Schultz, really demonstrating that they are no more qualified to be president than Trump. I think both of their campaigns essentially ended today. In brief, they overreacted, lied, and showed their true colors: they THINK they're qualified because they're rich, period. That's not how it works, buds.

Top
#310666 - 01/31/19 04:40 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13584
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger
Nate Silver had this to say about Schultz...

Quote:
it’s unbelievably arrogant for Howard Schultz to think that ‘Howard Schultz, as an independent, on a platform of deficit reduction, for president’ is the answer to any question that anybody has ever asked about anything,”


He's also against healthcare reform...

This might be one of those Neoliberals I've heard about.


Apparently not, because as we've all been told in the most shrill tones imaginable, any and all Democrats are all neoliberals, merely by virtue of their membership in the party, thus it is wrong and immoral to vote for any Democrat whatsoever.

[/sarcasm] rolleyes
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#310682 - 02/01/19 03:49 AM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: chunkstyle]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 41128
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
Quote:
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?

It's never too early to discuss getting rid of Fatass. smile
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#310683 - 02/01/19 02:22 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1294
Originally Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas
Originally Posted By: Greger
Nate Silver had this to say about Schultz...

Quote:
it’s unbelievably arrogant for Howard Schultz to think that ‘Howard Schultz, as an independent, on a platform of deficit reduction, for president’ is the answer to any question that anybody has ever asked about anything,”


He's also against healthcare reform...

This might be one of those Neoliberals I've heard about.




Apparently not, because as we've all been told in the most shrill tones imaginable, any and all Democrats are all neoliberals, merely by virtue of their membership in the party, thus it is wrong and immoral to vote for any Democrat whatsoever.

[/sarcasm] rolleyes


Hmmmm....
Feels like your referring to my posting Jeff. If so, your spinning my criticism of the Democratic Party. We've had neoliberal democratic presidents since Clinton. You may have trudged into a booth and thrown the lever for another back in 2016. To say that theres not a predominantly neoliberal concensus in the Democratic Party is like republicans saying there the Party of Lincoln.
It's really not a subtle concept to grasp. Theirs a range of democrats but the majority and the party organization is predominately neoliberal.
Sorry if that sounds shrill to your ears. Defending my posting, not trying to change your
I'll shut up now.


Edited by chunkstyle (02/01/19 02:28 PM)

Top
#310684 - 02/01/19 02:22 PM Re: Is it too soon to be talking 2020? [Re: pdx rick]
NW Ponderer Online   sad
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16560
I almost never cite to National Review, but here's a piece that bears reading: The Sham of American ‘Centrism’. It points out that the "centrism" espoused by Schultz and other "Independents" is really a very minority view. It also explains how Trump got to the White House, and where Dems won in 2018. It could be the formula for 2020.

BTW, Corey Booker announced.

Top
Page 1 of 24 1 2 3 ... 23 24 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 49 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2