What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
2000 - 8/21 - Columbus, OH 2003 - 6/18 - Chicago, IL 2006 - 5/22 - Auburn Hills, MI 2007 - 8/5 - Chicago, IL 2015 - 9/26 - New York, NY 2016 - 4/16 - Greenville, SC; 8/20 - Chicago, IL; 8/22 - Chicago, IL 2018 - 8/18 - Chicago, IL; 8/20 - Chicago, IL
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Incorrect. We blame the rubes that voted for Trump, for one moronic reason or another.
What I'm hearing from you is that you bear no responsibility for a conservative Presidency even though you voted for him in the most important swing state and campaigned tirelessly against his opponent without offering a viable option (Jill Stein, seriously?? Ben Stein had a better chance!). I'm also hearing that you don't really care what Trump does, because you are the only true liberal and Obama used drone strikes. Correct?
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Incorrect. We blame the rubes that voted for Trump, for one moronic reason or another.
What I'm hearing from you is that you bear no responsibility for a conservative Presidency even though you voted for him in the most important swing state and campaigned tirelessly against his opponent without offering a viable option (Jill Stein, seriously?? Ben Stein had a better chance!). I'm also hearing that you don't really care what Trump does, because you are the only true liberal and Obama used drone strikes. Correct?
What I'm hearing is that you will blindly vote Democrat no matter what they do, or don't do, good bad or otherwise, make zero demands of them, allow them to cheat you and expect things to get better for you and your fellow Democrats?
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Incorrect. We blame the rubes that voted for Trump, for one moronic reason or another.
What I'm hearing from you is that you bear no responsibility for a conservative Presidency even though you voted for him in the most important swing state and campaigned tirelessly against his opponent without offering a viable option (Jill Stein, seriously?? Ben Stein had a better chance!). I'm also hearing that you don't really care what Trump does, because you are the only true liberal and Obama used drone strikes. Correct?
What I'm hearing is that you will blindly vote Democrat no matter what they do, or don't do, good bad or otherwise, make zero demands of them, allow them to cheat you and expect things to get better for you and your fellow Democrats?
Elections are choices. This was the choice we had. Great became the enemy of good and now we have Trump. These are real consequences...22MM people losing medicare, the EPA a shell of itself, State completely skeleton staffed while the world drifts without leadership...
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Incorrect. We blame the rubes that voted for Trump, for one moronic reason or another.
What I'm hearing from you is that you bear no responsibility for a conservative Presidency even though you voted for him in the most important swing state and campaigned tirelessly against his opponent without offering a viable option (Jill Stein, seriously?? Ben Stein had a better chance!). I'm also hearing that you don't really care what Trump does, because you are the only true liberal and Obama used drone strikes. Correct?
What I'm hearing is that you will blindly vote Democrat no matter what they do, or don't do, good bad or otherwise, make zero demands of them, allow them to cheat you and expect things to get better for you and your fellow Democrats?
I could live with that for a thousand years and still call myself progressive without shame, I couldn't even look myself in the mirror if I voted for Donald Fucking Trump.
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Who's hyperventilating? Where did I blame Nader? I voted Nader in 2000, and although I know my vote didn't win or lose the election, I had to learn from that mistake. If you didn't learn from that, well then I guess that's your own personal issue. A vote for Stein was a vote for Trump, which you're OK with because "money in politics will never let single payer happen." Hmmm. Let that marinate for a minute.
I did, without explicitly asking, as for some sort of logic behind your view - which I don't understand. Apparently you didn't use logic, or your reasoning is so poor that you won't explain it. That's fine. I suppose at some point you'll respond with a meme and drop a total truth bomb on us, right?
2000 - 8/21 - Columbus, OH 2003 - 6/18 - Chicago, IL 2006 - 5/22 - Auburn Hills, MI 2007 - 8/5 - Chicago, IL 2015 - 9/26 - New York, NY 2016 - 4/16 - Greenville, SC; 8/20 - Chicago, IL; 8/22 - Chicago, IL 2018 - 8/18 - Chicago, IL; 8/20 - Chicago, IL
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Who's hyperventilating? Where did I blame Nader? I voted Nader in 2000, and although I know my vote didn't win or lose the election, I had to learn from that mistake. If you didn't learn from that, well then I guess that's your own personal issue. A vote for Stein was a vote for Trump, which you're OK with because "money in politics will never let single payer happen." Hmmm. Let that marinate for a minute.
I did, without explicitly asking, as for some sort of logic behind your view - which I don't understand. Apparently you didn't use logic, or your reasoning is so poor that you won't explain it. That's fine. I suppose at some point you'll respond with a meme and drop a total truth bomb on us, right?
The other option of course, is that it's a ruse. As I pointed out earlier, I think there are people in this world that are just "against".. no matter what it is. "I liked Bernie until he sold out".. "I always hated Clinton"... the bar is set in such a place that once a person gains momentum and material influence, well now they are bad....time to go for someone who doesn't have a chance.
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Who's hyperventilating? Where did I blame Nader? I voted Nader in 2000, and although I know my vote didn't win or lose the election, I had to learn from that mistake. If you didn't learn from that, well then I guess that's your own personal issue. A vote for Stein was a vote for Trump, which you're OK with because "money in politics will never let single payer happen." Hmmm. Let that marinate for a minute.
I did, without explicitly asking, as for some sort of logic behind your view - which I don't understand. Apparently you didn't use logic, or your reasoning is so poor that you won't explain it. That's fine. I suppose at some point you'll respond with a meme and drop a total truth bomb on us, right?
you didn't blame Nader nor did I say you did, I said democrats meaning most or some but not all, still blame Nader. your still focused on single issue single payer which I already stated that it was an example of corporate Dems not the be all end all for voting. anyway...I think you won, but I enjoyed the fight!
What about democrats that don't want single payer? Am I a sellout?
not at all. likely a sell out due to your position on political contributions, dark money, and corporations = humans.
So, were you with Bernie, or that person popular with many PJ fans that sat at the same table as Flynn and Putin? I can't really tell, and I'm not reading more than one page of your comments.
was never a huge Bernie fan, pegged him as a sellout long before his presidential run. speaking of litmus tests, a good litmus test for any politician is their position or better yet, changing position on Israel Palestine. I was hard core ABC from day 1. I would have voted a dead carcass before Hillary. I supported Jill Stein up until a few weeks before the election.
Good for you for being anyone but Clinton. Now we have Trump and a complete crony administration. Good thinking there Mr. Liberal.
For months I posted just how flawed your candidate was, long before most knew the name podesta, or obsessed over leaks and hacks. Who are the next leaders in the party now? Booker, Harris, Cuomo?
No one argued that she was the best possibole candidate. The question is who is the better choice in the general. Not voting for Clinton is the same as voting for Trump if done by a Democrat. Since you are in PA, you hold some level of responsibility for the chaos, drama and regressive policies in place today. Like I posted above.. if you like single payer, well then you're further away today than you were 8 months ago. Cut off your nose to spite your face perhaps?
I actually voted trump in a vote swap. As dumb as I am, I'm smart enough to know that money in politics will never let single payer happen. If California democrats won't allow for a public option, no way, never we will see single payer nationally.
Ok, so what I'm hearing is..........because you know we'll never get single payer, it's OK to have Trump as president (or at least vote in a way that if done nationwide will create a Trump presidency)? I'm sorry. I just don't get that logic. Anyone who leans liberal or Dem in anyway, should have learned the lesson of 2000. It's fun and cute to be idealistic when you're young and stupid and don't know any better, but we had this story play out already and it was a huge mistake.
why hyperventilate? its never about a single issue, maybe a single candidate. I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats. What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
Phony Democrats? Do you want the devil you know or the devil you don't? Democrats and Republicans all fall under the umbrella of "politicians", and politicians historically lie (transparently or not) to seize power.
Now here's a question for you:
What you are hoping for (a more honest DNC) is not realistic in the current landscape. The Democrats have slowly lost much of their power, by losing the votes of the people. On the other hand, the Republicans, by lying blatantly (and transparently), have proven that adage that "perception is reality", and that by saying "things are improving!", the public sentiment becomes exactly that. Why, then, should Democrats run towards honest improvement by true representation of the will of the people (instead of the corporations), as opposed to actual steps backwards (which profit party members) that are perceived as steps forward, when the former is unchartered territory, and the latter is proven to be effective? In order to not put the DNC at a tremendous disadvantage, the lot of American politicians need to be more honest - not just the DNC.
Until evidenced otherwise, attempting to reform to represent the true will of the people is fraught with risk based on an abundance of uncertainty. It would be hard to get insiders or outsiders on board with that (in terms of the majority - the required ratio to amount to change in policy). That's even harder because even with diminishing power, these greedy politicians (even on the Democrat side) still make a hell of a lot of money: so, from their perspective, why change?
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I assuming you're classifying the devil you don't know as republicans? that's just it, we know what republicans are, I'm not sure I know what democrats are. what are they? did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so? did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so? to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"? did he create excitement? did he connect with the base? how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
I assuming you're classifying the devil you don't know as republicans? that's just it, we know what republicans are, I'm not sure I know what democrats are. what are they? did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so? did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so? to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"? did he create excitement? did he connect with the base? how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
Really...you know what a Republican is? A republican for the last 30 years has been about protectionist trade policies? Have they been anti-immigration? Have they been pro-Russia? Have they been against NATO? What about their stance on the Korean Peninsula? It's really interesting that you know what a Republican is when the Republicans have been turned on their head by the tide of nationalism and populism. You're quite the sage I suppose.
I assuming you're classifying the devil you don't know as republicans? that's just it, we know what republicans are, I'm not sure I know what democrats are. what are they? did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so? did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so? to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"? did he create excitement? did he connect with the base? how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
Really...you know what a Republican is? A republican for the last 30 years has been about protectionist trade policies? Have they been anti-immigration? Have they been pro-Russia? Have they been against NATO? What about their stance on the Korean Peninsula? It's really interesting that you know what a Republican is when the Republicans have been turned on their head by the tide of nationalism and populism. You're quite the sage I suppose.
hey jumpy....let him answer the question. why do you feel the need to interject yourself when the no one asks for your tired old opinion? ever hear the phase...know your role? you and I been thru this back and forth for 5 months last year...I know it's difficult but please allow someone else to speak(civility, remember that word)! if you're incessant about speaking, explain your constant anger? didn't that go out with grungy teeth circa 1994?.....benjs, the floor is yours
I assuming you're classifying the devil you don't know as republicans? that's just it, we know what republicans are, I'm not sure I know what democrats are. what are they? did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so? did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so? to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"? did he create excitement? did he connect with the base? how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
Really...you know what a Republican is? A republican for the last 30 years has been about protectionist trade policies? Have they been anti-immigration? Have they been pro-Russia? Have they been against NATO? What about their stance on the Korean Peninsula? It's really interesting that you know what a Republican is when the Republicans have been turned on their head by the tide of nationalism and populism. You're quite the sage I suppose.
hey jumpy....let him answer the question. why do you feel the need to interject yourself when the no one asks for your tired old opinion? ever hear the phase...know your role? you and I been thru this back and forth for 5 months last year...I know it's difficult but please allow someone else you speak(civility, remember that word)! if you're incessant about speaking, explain your constant anger? didn't that go out grungy teeth?.....bends, the floor is yours
I may be flagged for swiping on a phone versus auto correct! sorry for the typos
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,335
Time Warp 2016, coming to an AMT theater near you!
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I assuming you're classifying the devil you don't know as republicans? that's just it, we know what republicans are, I'm not sure I know what democrats are. what are they? did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so? did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so? to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"? did he create excitement? did he connect with the base? how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
Really...you know what a Republican is? A republican for the last 30 years has been about protectionist trade policies? Have they been anti-immigration? Have they been pro-Russia? Have they been against NATO? What about their stance on the Korean Peninsula? It's really interesting that you know what a Republican is when the Republicans have been turned on their head by the tide of nationalism and populism. You're quite the sage I suppose.
hey jumpy....let him answer the question. why do you feel the need to interject yourself when the no one asks for your tired old opinion? ever hear the phase...know your role? you and I been thru this back and forth for 5 months last year...I know it's difficult but please allow someone else to speak(civility, remember that word)! if you're incessant about speaking, explain your constant anger? didn't that go out with grungy teeth circa 1994?.....benjs, the floor is yours
My role? Not my fault that you bring up arguments that are so full of holes that it takes two seconds of thought to blow through them. Once you post here, it's open season. Go ahead and bring up something else silly and without merit.
I assuming you're classifying the devil you don't know as republicans? that's just it, we know what republicans are, I'm not sure I know what democrats are. what are they? did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so? did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so? to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"? did he create excitement? did he connect with the base? how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
Really...you know what a Republican is? A republican for the last 30 years has been about protectionist trade policies? Have they been anti-immigration? Have they been pro-Russia? Have they been against NATO? What about their stance on the Korean Peninsula? It's really interesting that you know what a Republican is when the Republicans have been turned on their head by the tide of nationalism and populism. You're quite the sage I suppose.
hey jumpy....let him answer the question. why do you feel the need to interject yourself when the no one asks for your tired old opinion? ever hear the phase...know your role? you and I been thru this back and forth for 5 months last year...I know it's difficult but please allow someone else to speak(civility, remember that word)! if you're incessant about speaking, explain your constant anger? didn't that go out with grungy teeth circa 1994?.....benjs, the floor is yours
It's a forum, be a big boy. Who ever wants to answer, can. I hope you haven't been glued to the screen waiting; I went to a concert and didn't care to come back here and talk shop. Now heading up to beautiful north Ontario with my girlfriend. If I get a chance I'll gladly answer your questions, otherwise feel free to remind me at the end of the weekend!
Just very quickly, I actually meant the devil we don't know as the Dems, the opaque liars as opposed to the transparent ones. I don't have partisan allegiances and think they're both frauds. I'll explain my thoughts on Sanders after and we can take it from there.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,335
edited July 2017
I would like to throw out some thoughts for my friends here who are strong democratic party supporters:
I, too, was once strongly democrat. Over the years I have seen that party disappoint me in many ways. At one point, I was so pro-democrat and anti-republican that I simply voted dem across the board (yeah, I know, not very critical in my thinking, but that was then). Now, however, I much more often tend to vote independent or green. I think I am a fairly typical disconcerted ex-democrat. And for being fairly outspoken that way, I often get some strong negative feedback from those who are still strong dem supporters (not all, but enough, I think, to warrant writing about it). Hearing that kind of criticism doesn't hurt my feeling or upset me but at the same time, it does nothing to persuade me I was at all wrong in disavowing my loyalty to the democratic party. So my suggestion is to maybe listen to what those of us like me have to say, consider that we may have some valid points, and maybe take a closer look at your party to see what is working and what isn't. Marginalizing us won't bring us back. In fact, it only leads us to moving us further away.
OK, for what it's worth, that my little spiel and now I have to go to work for a few hours- a minor interruption to the weekend. I hope yours is going well, all!
Post edited by brianlux on
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I assuming you're classifying the devil you don't know as republicans? that's just it, we know what republicans are, I'm not sure I know what democrats are. what are they? did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so? did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so? to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"? did he create excitement? did he connect with the base? how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
As promised.
The Devil I don't know is the Democratic Party. As far as I'm concerned, while both parties lie, only one puts an effort in to hide it anymore.
What are the Democrats? The DNC, in my eyes, is a chimera - a Party composed of people adhering to a neoliberal agenda like Clinton did, and a small minority of people trying to usher in a new era of socially progressive populism. I can't claim to know the split between the neoliberal faction and the populist faction, but I would guess that in terms of those holding positions in the DNC, they would be predominantly neoliberals, and amongst the supporters they would be evenly split (basing this off of the election results, where Sanders and Clinton were neck-in-neck based on delegate votes, and overwhelmingly Clinton based on super delegate votes).
I feel Obama tried to appease both the neoliberal and populist factions, and did a better job on the former than the latter. I also feel that Clinton would have exclusively been able to appease the neoliberal faction.
On Sanders - two things. First, the successes Sanders saw proved that Americans are gullible. The promises Sanders made were equally bold and unsubstantiated as Trump's; plans were never discussed, while rhetoric was shared aplenty.
Next problem is, there are too many self-serving players within the DNC to actually permit reform. I feel that not working with superdelegates to pivot to support Sanders was a clear demonstration of the DNC's elite's unwillingness to relinquish power, in addition to an underestimation of the newly resurfaced populist movement in America.
When Sanders was defeated by Clinton, I said then and say now that it would have been a perfect opportunity to go Independent. I was listening to Democracy Now on Friday, and there was a Croatian philosopher talking about G20, and how people like Merkel are being put on this pedestal as a sort of anti-Trump. His statement was dead-on: these are all people on two sides of the same coin. I feel that the DNC at this point has deep roots in the neoliberal movement, and trying to reform them won't happen, but given a third option, for the first time in modern American history, I feel there would be an opportunity for a true, honest, populist, socially progressive Party.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
^^what's your definition of neo-liberal? Are you speaking of the economic philosophy or the foreign policy philosophy? It's hard to assess your view without knowing that definition.
Second - what's socially progressive populism? Are you combining populist economics with a social policy? For example, I would not consider myself a populist economically. I am a supporter of free trade, by and large, with the right safeguards. The killing of the Pacific treaty will not help American workers one iota; it will probably hurt them pretty dramatically. But I'm a social progressive. So I'm half of that phrase, but not the whole.
In all, donors from the health services sector and major health insurers gave more than $16 million to Democraticcandidatesand the CaliforniaDemocratic Partyin the 2014 election cycle -- almost double what donors from those industries gave inthe2006election, according to data from the National Institute on Money In State Politics. Donors from those sectors collectively donated more than $3 million toBrownandRendon since 2010.
In light of that history, longtime single-payer proponents argue that this is a watershed moment for Democrats in advance of the 2018 election. They assert that the California fight will demonstrate whether or not Democrats in the Trump era are willing to use the power they still retain at the state level to defy their major corporate donors and enact the policies they tell voters they support.
In all, donors from the health services sector and major health insurers gave more than $16 million to Democraticcandidatesand the CaliforniaDemocratic Partyin the 2014 election cycle -- almost double what donors from those industries gave inthe2006election, according to data from the National Institute on Money In State Politics. Donors from those sectors collectively donated more than $3 million toBrownandRendon since 2010.
In light of that history, longtime single-payer proponents argue that this is a watershed moment for Democrats in advance of the 2018 election. They assert that the California fight will demonstrate whether or not Democrats in the Trump era are willing to use the power they still retain at the state level to defy their major corporate donors and enact the policies they tell voters they support.
In all, donors from the health services sector and major health insurers gave more than $16 million to Democraticcandidatesand the CaliforniaDemocratic Partyin the 2014 election cycle -- almost double what donors from those industries gave inthe2006election, according to data from the National Institute on Money In State Politics. Donors from those sectors collectively donated more than $3 million toBrownandRendon since 2010.
In light of that history, longtime single-payer proponents argue that this is a watershed moment for Democrats in advance of the 2018 election. They assert that the California fight will demonstrate whether or not Democrats in the Trump era are willing to use the power they still retain at the state level to defy their major corporate donors and enact the policies they tell voters they support.
Anything illegal about that money? If not, why would anyone follow it? Citizens United.
nothing illegal, I'm simply following the money. question is, other than the increases in campaign contributions, what changed the Democratic leadership minds about single payer?
ps: ignore the true progressive Democrat in the race
Whatever dude. You're not a democrat and not a progressive or a liberal. Your posts on this page are intended to sow discontent and fracture for the six people that read it. Go to Reddit or 4Chan and take up the cause there.
Keith Ellison met his own resistance at a summer resistance rally.
Less than five minutes into DNC Deputy Chair Keith Ellison’s introductory remarks, a group of people stood up and chanted vehemently, “Single payer now!” They unfurled a banner across an entire pew, and heckled the speakers so freely that an older woman made the sign of the cross, as if warding off their revolutionary spirits, and said, “Shame on you.” Ellison’s remarks about party unification were nearly inaudible because two attendees were standing and screaming at each other.
Keith Ellison met his own resistance at a summer resistance rally.
Less than five minutes into DNC Deputy Chair Keith Ellison’s introductory remarks, a group of people stood up and chanted vehemently, “Single payer now!” They unfurled a banner across an entire pew, and heckled the speakers so freely that an older woman made the sign of the cross, as if warding off their revolutionary spirits, and said, “Shame on you.” Ellison’s remarks about party unification were nearly inaudible because two attendees were standing and screaming at each other.
These people are expecting an impotent party to achieve something big? Baby steps. First the party has to get back into relevance...which is a ways off.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Keith Ellison met his own resistance at a summer resistance rally.
Less than five minutes into DNC Deputy Chair Keith Ellison’s introductory remarks, a group of people stood up and chanted vehemently, “Single payer now!” They unfurled a banner across an entire pew, and heckled the speakers so freely that an older woman made the sign of the cross, as if warding off their revolutionary spirits, and said, “Shame on you.” Ellison’s remarks about party unification were nearly inaudible because two attendees were standing and screaming at each other.
These people are expecting an impotent party to achieve something big? Baby steps. First the party has to get back into relevance...which is a ways off.
Agree, first thou a leader of the party must emerge or leaders. recently the King of Crooked Terry McAuliffe was asked who are the leaders in the Dem party and he had no answers. Talking about devils you don't know, check out McAuliffe and his electric car shenanigans.
Comments
2003 - 6/18 - Chicago, IL
2006 - 5/22 - Auburn Hills, MI
2007 - 8/5 - Chicago, IL
2015 - 9/26 - New York, NY
2016 - 4/16 - Greenville, SC; 8/20 - Chicago, IL; 8/22 - Chicago, IL
2018 - 8/18 - Chicago, IL; 8/20 - Chicago, IL
livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=3045
I'm using California as one example of phony Democrats.
What I'm hearing is democrats will continue to blame everyone except themselves for Trump for at least the next 17 years similar to how they still blame Nader for Bush 2000. correct?
We blame the rubes that voted for Trump, for one moronic reason or another.
What I'm hearing from you is that you bear no responsibility for a conservative Presidency even though you voted for him in the most important swing state and campaigned tirelessly against his opponent without offering a viable option (Jill Stein, seriously?? Ben Stein had a better chance!).
I'm also hearing that you don't really care what Trump does, because you are the only true liberal and Obama used drone strikes.
Correct?
I did, without explicitly asking, as for some sort of logic behind your view - which I don't understand. Apparently you didn't use logic, or your reasoning is so poor that you won't explain it. That's fine. I suppose at some point you'll respond with a meme and drop a total truth bomb on us, right?
2003 - 6/18 - Chicago, IL
2006 - 5/22 - Auburn Hills, MI
2007 - 8/5 - Chicago, IL
2015 - 9/26 - New York, NY
2016 - 4/16 - Greenville, SC; 8/20 - Chicago, IL; 8/22 - Chicago, IL
2018 - 8/18 - Chicago, IL; 8/20 - Chicago, IL
livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=3045
your still focused on single issue single payer which I already stated that it was an example of corporate Dems not the be all end all for voting.
anyway...I think you won, but I enjoyed the fight!
Now here's a question for you:
What you are hoping for (a more honest DNC) is not realistic in the current landscape. The Democrats have slowly lost much of their power, by losing the votes of the people. On the other hand, the Republicans, by lying blatantly (and transparently), have proven that adage that "perception is reality", and that by saying "things are improving!", the public sentiment becomes exactly that. Why, then, should Democrats run towards honest improvement by true representation of the will of the people (instead of the corporations), as opposed to actual steps backwards (which profit party members) that are perceived as steps forward, when the former is unchartered territory, and the latter is proven to be effective? In order to not put the DNC at a tremendous disadvantage, the lot of American politicians need to be more honest - not just the DNC.
Until evidenced otherwise, attempting to reform to represent the true will of the people is fraught with risk based on an abundance of uncertainty. It would be hard to get insiders or outsiders on board with that (in terms of the majority - the required ratio to amount to change in policy). That's even harder because even with diminishing power, these greedy politicians (even on the Democrat side) still make a hell of a lot of money: so, from their perspective, why change?
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
did Obama represent who democrats are (the devil I know)? how so?
did Hillary represent what democrats are? how so?
to answer your question on why democrats should run towards honesty and improvement (populism) my short answer is.... Bernie Sanders! you don't think Bernie's run is "evidence otherwise"?
did he create excitement? did he connect with the base?
how long have I heard about dire choices between "insert Republican here"? aren't you tired of the same repeated Democratic message and scare tactics? "I'm still here"
Bernies campaign and trump being elected is all the evidence I need to show just how desperate the forgotten American voter craves some semblance of "honesty" and "what about us?"
ever hear the phase...know your role?
you and I been thru this back and forth for 5 months last year...I know it's difficult but please allow someone else to speak(civility, remember that word)!
if you're incessant about speaking, explain your constant anger? didn't that go out with grungy teeth circa 1994?.....benjs, the floor is yours
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Just very quickly, I actually meant the devil we don't know as the Dems, the opaque liars as opposed to the transparent ones. I don't have partisan allegiances and think they're both frauds. I'll explain my thoughts on Sanders after and we can take it from there.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I, too, was once strongly democrat. Over the years I have seen that party disappoint me in many ways. At one point, I was so pro-democrat and anti-republican that I simply voted dem across the board (yeah, I know, not very critical in my thinking, but that was then). Now, however, I much more often tend to vote independent or green. I think I am a fairly typical disconcerted ex-democrat. And for being fairly outspoken that way, I often get some strong negative feedback from those who are still strong dem supporters (not all, but enough, I think, to warrant writing about it). Hearing that kind of criticism doesn't hurt my feeling or upset me but at the same time, it does nothing to persuade me I was at all wrong in disavowing my loyalty to the democratic party. So my suggestion is to maybe listen to what those of us like me have to say, consider that we may have some valid points, and maybe take a closer look at your party to see what is working and what isn't. Marginalizing us won't bring us back. In fact, it only leads us to moving us further away.
OK, for what it's worth, that my little spiel and now I have to go to work for a few hours- a minor interruption to the weekend. I hope yours is going well, all!
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The Devil I don't know is the Democratic Party. As far as I'm concerned, while both parties lie, only one puts an effort in to hide it anymore.
What are the Democrats? The DNC, in my eyes, is a chimera - a Party composed of people adhering to a neoliberal agenda like Clinton did, and a small minority of people trying to usher in a new era of socially progressive populism. I can't claim to know the split between the neoliberal faction and the populist faction, but I would guess that in terms of those holding positions in the DNC, they would be predominantly neoliberals, and amongst the supporters they would be evenly split (basing this off of the election results, where Sanders and Clinton were neck-in-neck based on delegate votes, and overwhelmingly Clinton based on super delegate votes).
I feel Obama tried to appease both the neoliberal and populist factions, and did a better job on the former than the latter. I also feel that Clinton would have exclusively been able to appease the neoliberal faction.
On Sanders - two things. First, the successes Sanders saw proved that Americans are gullible. The promises Sanders made were equally bold and unsubstantiated as Trump's; plans were never discussed, while rhetoric was shared aplenty.
Next problem is, there are too many self-serving players within the DNC to actually permit reform. I feel that not working with superdelegates to pivot to support Sanders was a clear demonstration of the DNC's elite's unwillingness to relinquish power, in addition to an underestimation of the newly resurfaced populist movement in America.
When Sanders was defeated by Clinton, I said then and say now that it would have been a perfect opportunity to go Independent. I was listening to Democracy Now on Friday, and there was a Croatian philosopher talking about G20, and how people like Merkel are being put on this pedestal as a sort of anti-Trump. His statement was dead-on: these are all people on two sides of the same coin. I feel that the DNC at this point has deep roots in the neoliberal movement, and trying to reform them won't happen, but given a third option, for the first time in modern American history, I feel there would be an opportunity for a true, honest, populist, socially progressive Party.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Second - what's socially progressive populism? Are you combining populist economics with a social policy? For example, I would not consider myself a populist economically. I am a supporter of free trade, by and large, with the right safeguards. The killing of the Pacific treaty will not help American workers one iota; it will probably hurt them pretty dramatically. But I'm a social progressive. So I'm half of that phrase, but not the whole.
In all, donors from the health services sector and major health insurers gave more than $16 million to Democratic candidatesand the California Democratic Partyin the 2014 election cycle -- almost double what donors from those industries gave in the 2006 election, according to data from the National Institute on Money In State Politics. Donors from those sectors collectively donated more than $3 million to Brown and Rendon since 2010.
In light of that history, longtime single-payer proponents argue that this is a watershed moment for Democrats in advance of the 2018 election. They assert that the California fight will demonstrate whether or not Democrats in the Trump era are willing to use the power they still retain at the state level to defy their major corporate donors and enact the policies they tell voters they support.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/california-health-care-fight-may-show-democratic-party-future-trump-era-2562684?amp=1
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
http://observer.com/2017/07/randy-bryce-cathy-myers-paul-ryan/amp/
ps: ignore the true progressive Democrat in the race
Less than five minutes into DNC Deputy Chair Keith Ellison’s introductory remarks, a group of people stood up and chanted vehemently, “Single payer now!” They unfurled a banner across an entire pew, and heckled the speakers so freely that an older woman made the sign of the cross, as if warding off their revolutionary spirits, and said, “Shame on you.” Ellison’s remarks about party unification were nearly inaudible because two attendees were standing and screaming at each other.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Talking about devils you don't know, check out McAuliffe and his electric car shenanigans.
http://pagesix.com/2017/07/15/kamala-harris-meets-with-democratic-elite-in-hamptons/amp/