The Democratic Party left me behind — and I'm not alone

You're probably right. Perhaps Hillary would've gone with the progressive movement in the Dem base. Appreciate the respectful write up!

No problem. Glad to have the conversation.

One more thing I forgot to mention:

Hillary was big on health care reform when she was a first lady and a senator.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993

I think it's fair to say that her long term desire is for universal healthcare (as I think is true for most democratic politicians).

However, I think it has to gain major traction with the voters before anyone can it get there (it's heading that way).
 
However, I think it has to gain major traction with the voters before anyone can it get there (it's heading that way).

It's not going to matter because the SCOTUS is lost. The GOP will put up some frivolous challenge, and the SCOTUS will uphold it. Elections aren't jokes or symbolic contests. Trump winning in 2016 was the end of the possibility of single payer in America for a generation, at least.
 
Nope, I expected this. My vote for Trump was an anti-Hillary vote. I'm tired of being forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, as are many people. If the Dems want my vote then they have to earn it. They can't just get votes anymore by not being the Republicans.
So you voted for the greater of two evils. Brilliant.
 
Let me get this straight, some people voted Trump to advance progressive policies?
 
It's not going to matter because the SCOTUS is lost. The GOP will put up some frivolous challenge, and the SCOTUS will uphold it. Elections aren't jokes or symbolic contests. Trump winning in 2016 was the end of the possibility of single payer in America for a generation, at least.

I've been thinking about this, but If the Dems retake congress and the senate and actually passed a comprehensive law, I don't know if the SC would actually interfere with it. If they start making super unpopular rulings over democratically created laws, the SC would implode.

Edit: more towards my point I think they're too chicken shit to get rid of Rowe V. Wade for that very reason.
 
Screen_Shot_2017_07_13_at_1.09.20_PM.0.png
Would rock that Music⚡Band shirt.
 
I've been thinking about this, but If the Dems retake congress and the senate and actually passed a comprehensive law, I don't know if the SC would actually interfere with it. If they start making super unpopular rulings over democratically created laws, the SC would implode.

Edit: more towards my point I think they're too chicken shit to get rid of Rowe V. Wade for that very reason.

We'll see, I guess. I do expect Democrats to push for it. I'm not a lawyer, but I thought the argument in King was ludicrous, and it was scary to see it taken seriously.
<puh-lease75>

Who would you say gets that honor? I think people might say FDR. Some fundamental changes make it hard to compare going back that far.
 
We'll see, I guess. I do expect Democrats to push for it. I'm not a lawyer, but I thought the argument in King was ludicrous, and it was scary to see it taken seriously.


Who would you say gets that honor? I think people might say FDR. Some fundamental changes make it hard to compare going back that far.
FDR was who I was going to say. There's no question that in every metric save for race and sexual orientation, that he is more liberal.

If FDR was around today, he'd be like Bernie, but much more effective.

Also, Ralph Nader is more liberal than Clinton by a good margin.
 
FDR was who I was going to say. There's no question that in every metric save for race and sexual orientation, that he is more liberal.

If FDR was around today, he'd be like Bernie, but much more effective.

Also, Ralph Nader is more liberal than Clinton by a good margin.

I don't count Nader, but OK. I can go with "most liberal since FDR," though I think a detailed look would call that one into question, too. FDR was the original neoliberal sellout, and represented the moderate wing of a more leftist party (saw himself as kind of mediating between management and labor and as a defender of the capitalist order).
 
Last edited:
We'll see, I guess. I do expect Democrats to push for it. I'm not a lawyer, but I thought the argument in King was ludicrous, and it was scary to see it taken seriously.

The democrats have to wean themselves off the SC protecting their constituents from bad legislation and start to focus on winning and controlling state legislatures and house elections and passing their own legislation.

I can't sugar coat it and pretend its good, but its the reality moving forward. I sincerely think if the democrats begin to sweep shit and the SC sees that people are voting for liberal policies, they will back off out of their own self-interest.
 
Last edited:
Russia wasn't even a factor until they successfully placed a puppet in the WH. And the notion that Clinton would be doing more bombing than Trump is ridiculous.



Again, Trump actually has greatly escalated the threat in NK, and there has long been a dialogue with them. It sounds like you're basing your understanding on simple factual errors, but I suspect that correcting the errors would just cause you to look for a new basis rather than re-orient your thinking.



Other countries don't pay for our defense. Obama already pressured other countries to make a recommitment to their own defense, and that is still the framework of the deal in place. Trump has done nothing of substance in that area.



Unauthorized immigration fell dramatically under Obama, and the population of unauthorized immigrants fell every year under his presidency. Clinton actually called for increased measures to secure the border relative to the very strong present baseline. Again, this is just a factual error. She had a very modest target for refugee acceptance (too modest).



The one good thing that Trump has actually done is fill Fed vacancies with the same types of people that Obama was filling them with, and I am quite relieved about that (there had been suggestions that they'd be filled with hawks, but I suspect that's like the deficit--Republicans are hawks when out of power and doves in power).


I was referring to Trump pushing other countries to commit military spending on their own countries. Trump pressured Trudeau to finally pay the 2 percent on military defense that Canada had not been paying but promised to fulfill that obligation. Canada is guilty of not paying its fair share and instead relying heavily on the US for protection. Though, even with the increase in military spending Canada will still remain heavily dependent on the US for military support.

The tension between North and South Korea has been on the down-swing. There was a period where many South Koreans were convinced a war was going to break out. Now, the South Korean military has been cancelling certain public emergency and military drills in a show of solidarity towards the North. Things have changed for the better (at least for now) between North and South Korea under Trump.
 
Let me get this straight, some people voted Trump to advance progressive policies?


<TrumpWrong1>


People voted for Trump because they did not want to vote for Hillary and support the democrats. I think what hurt Hillary more than anything was the obnoxious, self-righteous and smug celebrities, pundits, activists and academics that supported her. Trump voters were not voting for Hope and Change. The "deplorables" voted against a political movement that openly despises them.
 
I was referring to Trump pushing other countries to commit military spending on their own countries. Trump pressured Trudeau to finally pay the 2 percent on military defense that Canada had not been paying but promised to fulfill that obligation. Canada is guilty of not paying its fair share and instead relying heavily on the US for protection. Though, even with the increase in military spending Canada will still remain heavily dependent on the US for military support.

The tension between North and South Korea has been on the down-swing. There was a period where many South Koreans were convinced a war was going to break out. Now, the South Korean military has been cancelling certain public emergency and military drills in a show of solidarity towards the North. Things have changed for the better (at least for now) between North and South Korea under Trump.

Trump did nothing to make other countries pay more for their own defense (and that has nothing to do with us anyway). There was already a deal in 2014 to recommit.

The tension spiked as a result of Trump's stupidity, and while it's down from its peak, things are still worse than they were before he started bungling.
 
Oh sweet!

So now the war cry is “anyone critizing democrates is a russian bot!”?

Lol

You guys dont fail at finding new ways to fail!
 
Trump did nothing to make other countries pay more for their own defense (and that has nothing to do with us anyway). There was already a deal in 2014 to recommit.

The tension spiked as a result of Trump's stupidity, and while it's down from its peak, things are still worse than they were before he started bungling.

Trudeau bills 10-year defence spending plan as answer to Trump spending call

North Korea would have accelerated their regardless of who was President. The difference is that Trump knows how to handle people like "Rocket Man" while Hillary would have likely provoked a full-blown war.
 
Thought I would share this article from USA Today, its not a typical article you see, would like to read your opinions on it.

USA Today Network Saritha Prabhu, The Tennessean Opinion

I’m no Trump supporter, but I’ve been repulsed by the political and cultural left’s hatred, demonization and mistreatment of the president.

I am a Democrat who has spent the last two years often criticizing my own party and fellow Democrats.

Yeah, I’m a bad Democrat, I know.

I have friends and readers asking me, “Are you still a liberal?” and “Have you changed parties?” and “Why are you seemingly defending Trump?”

I’ve been a loyal Democrat for about 15 years. As someone who became a citizen in 2006, I became a Democrat during the George W. Bush years, because I liked the party’s anti-war, pro-minority, pro-environment, pro-little guy positions.

But the 2016 election was an eye-opener for me. To use the current political jargon, I became “woke,” in some very different ways, and I got “red-pilled.”

It was the year I recognized that our two political parties have become dinosaurs, ossified beyond recognition. Yes, there’s grassroots energy in the Democratic Party, but party leadership is essentially bereft of ideas.

It was the year I joined millions of Americans in losing faith in the ruling class of both parties and in many of our political institutions.

It was also the year this voter became increasingly frustrated that our national media outlets — cable, network and legacy news media — have self-bifurcated into stark pro- and anti-Trump factions.

It's us against the establishment
The real divisions, as I see it, aren’t between Democrats and Republicans, but between the political and corporate ruling class and the national media establishments that support them, on the one hand, and the rest of us. All the other divisions are less consequential.

Politicians from both parties have gotten away with letting down ordinary Americans for decades because millions of Americans are culturally wedded to their tribal political identities of Republican or Democrat, and can’t think outside the box.

Looked at this way, the election of Donald Trump made perfect sense to me. Sixty-three million voters — including African-Americans, Hispanics and Democrats — rejected status quo politics and voted for a strong, rank outsider to shake the establishment from their comfortable perches.

Would President Donald Trump’s supporters have preferred a decent, moral, well-behaved, well-informed populist? Sure, but in dire times, you take the populist who shows up because beggars can’t be choosers, etc.

The Democratic Party and its followers have left me for many reasons, but here are a few examples:

  • The party and its followers have been showing illiberal tendencies for some time.
  • It has gone off the rails on immigration, free speech, identity politics and some other issues — a topic I’ll defer for another day.
  • I’m no Trump supporter, but I’ve been horrified and repulsed by the political and cultural left’s hatred, demonization and mistreatment of President Trump, his family, his administration officials and his voters, which is even worse (if that’s possible) than what the right did to President Obama.
I view the current political climate both as a citizen and a writer.

As a citizen, I see myself more as a political orphan — neither Democrat or Republican.

For an opinion writer, self-identifying as a Democrat (or Republican) can be constricting. It can consciously or unconsciously make you hew to positions, make you defend the indefensible. It can give you cognitive dissonance.

For example: Defending Hillary Clinton in 2016 and the Democratic Party’s current far-left stance on immigration would’ve required me to be dishonest about my views or to contort my opinions into impossible positions.

I see myself as a political independent these days, who’ll opine based on what she sees and thinks, not along party lines.

For what it’s worth, renegades like me are like that canary in the coal mine: We’re trying to warn Democrats when they’re tone-deaf or still don’t get it.

Saritha Prabhu is a columnist at the Tennessean,
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...09/democratic-party-left-me-column/766561002/

Cliffs: Broad puts out but double bag it.
 
Back
Top