Political Discussion

yukbon said:
oh no no no, not even aiming for the presidency or leadership roles. Just someone to sound completely insane and bring the discourse back to normal. One of the big problems IMO is that every slightly liberal idea is treated as The Return Of Communism! So AOC says "it's a travesty that we don't pay a living wage" and 5 minutes later your facebook and commentary feeds see cartoonish charicatures of a dumb sassy latina bartender advocating for full-on communism. Or you have Bernie Sanders saying "healthcare should not be tied to employment, it should be available to all no matter what" and that turns into death panels or whatever. Completely normal discussions can't be had because the right treats every minor effort at some sort of progressive movement at a full tilt assault on something. Which is how you get things like attacks on science and expertise and "how dare you tell me how to act during a pandemic that is killing literally hundreds of thousands".

So you go hard and when someone complains that gun laws are oneruous and unconstitutional with some "them libs're comin' for yer guns!", you get, some democrat on Fox News going "hell yeah we're coming for your guns and we're giving them to any immigrants that come across the border! With free medicare and two medical marijuana cards! and a buy-1-get-2-free coupon for planned parenthood visits!"

And after that, someone more rational saying "you know, maybe we could just demand that gun owners carry gun insurance, like with cars? or doctors with malpractice insurance?" comes off as a middle ground.

The right has done this for years; demanding the left compromise and meet in the middle, and when they do the right inevitably moves further right. The Obamacare fiasco is a perfect example; the ACA is basically the same model that Romney pulled as governor, that Gingrich had put forth in 1996. Since what Obama actually wanted -- single-payer -- was going to go over like a fart in a church, they went 'ok, we'll use their plan, it's better than nothing and it's not half-bad at what it does do', only to be told that it was full of socialist death panels and obama's death squads were going to come to your gran's and execute her in front of her book club for having arthritis or whatever.
Click to expand...
okay that makes more sense. I think Democrats think that masses will listen to reason or trust that the average american will know that what they're (Dems) advocating for is not full on socialism/communism. The problem is that the average american does not think critically or logically so they (Dems) do need someone to create counter arguments to break through the talking points that the GOP is so good at doing.
 
Tyr said:
I see your overarching point and agree with two of the three points you conveyed (mostly). However, I too shall disagree with that last statement.

The last thing I would want to see is both main political parties devolving into a circus side-show wherein they just try and out-crazy the other party. To me, that's just going to stoke the flames of further division along the center and entrench the outliers of the party more firmly in their positions. A great short-term strategy to accomplish nothing, and a horrendous long term strategy to make real comprehensive changes.

What the democratic party needs, in my opinion, is a two-fold strategy. First, there needs to be some agreement amongst the rank and file over both near term and long term strategies. It cannot just be a focus on the short term wins, there needs to be end-game discussions/strategy sessions and multiple paths to achieving those goals. The GOP utilizes think tanks a great deal and its something I don't see the Democrats doing as often. They need to understand that as intelligent as they are, there is always someone more intelligent out there as well as people with distinct perspectives on how to achieve those end-run goals. Second, and here's where I agree with you @yukbon, they need a party lead (not even necessarily an official party-head) who thinks like a chess player. Long-term strategists who don't mind sacrificing pieces in order to enhance positioning on the board. It may not feel as satisfying in the near term, but the current brand of Dem strategy isn't aggressive enough to win the game. If anything, it just results in more stalemates.

Dems need to create a new think tank and invite Magnus Carlsen. LOL
Click to expand...
Personally, I see this time as real for 3rd party. Dems are practically deprecated at this point as they do not represent progressivism. All this head against the wall posting is because the thinking is limited to a two party system. The problem here IS the two party system.
 
debianlinux said:
Personally, I see this time as real for 3rd party. Dems are practically deprecated at this point as they do not represent progressivism. All this head against the wall posting is because the thinking is limited to a two party system. The problem here IS the two party system.
Click to expand...
True - the aged, entrenched old-school Corporate Dems don't jibe with the younger AOC types. It really is like 2 different parties.
 
debianlinux said:
Personally, I see this time as real for 3rd party. Dems are practically deprecated at this point as they do not represent progressivism. All this head against the wall posting is because the thinking is limited to a two party system. The problem here IS the two party system.
Click to expand...
^^^This. The older Dems are neoliberals and we have already proven in 2020, that doesn't work for most people. The older dems refuse to listen to the working poor, and this is why Trump gained a foot hold--not because he actually helped them, but because he understood that disgruntled working poor are not that hard to galvanize when you offer to bring back better paying jobs with good benefits. Hmmm, it's it funny how people just want a living wage and healthcare they can actually afford to use. This sort of sounds like all the stuff AOC is talking about...
 
debianlinux said:
Personally, I see this time as real for 3rd party. Dems are practically deprecated at this point as they do not represent progressivism. All this head against the wall posting is because the thinking is limited to a two party system. The problem here IS the two party system.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on principle. I would love to see a 3rd party option emerge from all of this mess.

However, the realist in me (shut up, its there, its just a small percentage ;)) thinks this is only achievable in a 15-20 year timeline. Sure, it could be done right now, but enacting a multi-party system, wherein the newly created party can gain enough of a foothold to really drive any sort of meaningful and impactful change, takes long-term planning. And time, hence my 15-20 year timeline.

My thinking is that the more progressive elements of the Democratic party need to continue changing the primary objectives of the party itself from within WHILE working to create footholds in the opposing party. Over a long enough timeline, the face of the party itself changes while partnerships are formed across the aisle. Its the whole 'sacrificing chess pieces to advance your end game positioning' strategy.

But I work in healthcare, so really what do I know? lol
 
Our findings on the effects of growth and unemployment provide evidence against supply-side theories that suggest lower taxes on the rich will induce labour supply responses from high-income individuals (more hours of work, more effort etc.) that boost economic activity. They are, in fact, more in line with recent empirical research showing that income tax holidays and windfall gains do not lead individuals to significantly alter the amount they work.

Our results have important implications for current debates around the economic consequences of taxing the rich, as they provide causal evidence that supports the growing pool of evidence from correlational studies that cutting taxes on the rich increases top income shares, but has little effect on economic performance.
www.commondreams.org

Study of 50 Years of Tax Cuts For Rich Confirms 'Trickle Down' Theory Is an Absolute Sham

"Major tax cuts for the rich since the 1980s have increased income inequality, with all the problems that brings, without any offsetting gains in economic performance."
www.commondreams.org www.commondreams.org
 
Holy hell, check out this wild statement from Putin:

“If there was such a desire, it would have been done,” Putin said with a chuckle.


apnews.com

Putin denies involvement in poisoning of Kremlin foe Navalny

MOSCOW (AP) — Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday rejected allegations that the Kremlin was behind the poisoning of his top political foe, opposition leader Alexei Navalny, and accused U.S. intelligence agencies of fomenting the claims even as he held out hope for better ties with Washingto
apnews.com apnews.com

I know it’s not directly tied to US politics (as per the thread title) but really, world politics are US politics.
 
djdavedk said:

This is what I was referring to about Amazon warehouse jobs.
Click to expand...
“Bloomberg's conclusion is false—it violates over 50 years of economic thought, and suspends the law of supply and demand,” a company spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “Hiring more, by paying less, simply does not work. Many of our employees join Amazon from other jobs in retail which tend to be predominantly part-time, reduced benefit jobs with substantially less than our $15 minimum wage. These employees see a big increase in pay per hour, total take-home pay, and overall benefits versus their previous jobs. What surprises us is that we are the focus of a story like this when some of the country’s largest employers, including the largest retailer, have yet to join us in raising the minimum wage to $15.”
Click to expand...

Excuse me? I guess this response by Amazon is like saying that article about 50 years of research on trickle down economics provides no benefit is false.

They simple do not care about the facts and only their bottom line. Sure some of the people they higher are probably coming from lower wage jobs like they said. But that doesn't mean it doesn't impact the industry in the area. A lot of places set wages on industry averages / competition. And if those industry average wages go down or don't go up, people not working for Amazon are impacted.

Also, many people in the industry end up at places like Amazon where they make considerably lest because Amazon is where the jobs are.
 
Tyr said:
I know it’s not directly tied to US politics (as per the thread title) but really, world politics are US politics.
Click to expand...
at one point in the old place, the title was broader and some of us have expressed it is time to revert to something like just "politics" again.

we have international members that weigh in on what's going on in their country and ours. think global, act local, and equal opportunity complaining- I'm about it.
 
gouis said:
Fuck Mike Pence. No one in this administration deserves the vaccine. They should be last in line. Fucking hypocrites. I'm done.
Click to expand...
I understand this sentiment, I really do. That said, we've got a significant percentage of the American population who are going to toe whatever line this party and its party heads put down. From that perspective I can express some small amount of gratitude that the right thing is being done for a change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top