Elections "Democrats' Basic Message Should Be Respect for Workers" Sherrod Brown 2020?

[grimballer]

Fully disagree. The dems lost last time trying to run a right-leaning centrist. And they continue to support an unpopular right-leaning centrist as speaker who is constantly used to rile up the GOP base.

Only way the dems win is by promoting legitimate progressive policies that the majority of Americans support. Workers rights, infrastructure, climate change, etc.

They lose by playing identity politics with the trannies and immigrants along with seeking the support of free-market low tax conservative voters.

They lost cause they tried portraying their candidate for more than she was (lying, flip flopping, opportunistic career politician). She was simply very unpopular n ppl saw through her.

The problem with “progressives” is their entire message is identity politics n attacking the core n main principles/foundation of America (n western world).

Don’t think majority of ppl really want a militant pc brigades telling them what’s acceptable n what’s not, or an unruly fanatics screaming at them for disagreeing on some political issues.

 

[xcvbn]

They lost cause they tried portraying their candidate for more than she was (lying, flip flopping, opportunistic career politician). She was simply very unpopular n ppl saw through her.

The problem with “progressives” is their entire message is identity politics n attacking the core n main principles/foundation of America (n western world).

Don’t think majority of ppl really want a militant pc brigades telling them what’s acceptable n what’s not, or an unruly fanatics screaming at them for disagreeing on some political issues.

I don't think you actually know what progressive politicians stand for.

Hint: it's not the ridiculous tranny bathroom shit that the MSM uses to turn off prospective voters.

It's Medicare for all, protect the environment, support the working class, rebuild our infrastructure.

 

[xcvbn]

only way to attract white working voters back to the DEMs...

it certainly isn't blaming them for everything

Can't knock the corporate dems for trying to both win the presidency and not garner too much working class support as to awaken the silent majority who could force the Democratic party to actually support the working class

 

[HunterSdVa29]

Can't knock the corporate dems for trying to both win the presidency and not garner too much working class support as to awaken the silent majority who could force the Democratic party to actually support the working class

I guess
if they just did that, they'd shore up massive support for their party and essentially a deathknell for the GOP

 

[grimballer]

I don't think you actually know what progressive politicians stand for.

Hint: it's not the ridiculous tranny bathroom shit that the MSM uses to turn off prospective voters.

It's Medicare for all, protect the environment, support the working class, rebuild our infrastructure.

That’s the reality for “progressive” politicians today. They have to go with tranny bathroom stuff or they get labeled “right winger” or “fake” progressive by progressives themselves.

Also even if we ignore the tranny bathroom stuff, progressive platform consists of radical changes that would lead to increased taxes, increased government spending/deficit, more n more government regulations/red tape...

Don’t think middle class wants these radical changes.

 

[xcvbn]

I guess
if they just did that, they'd shore up massive support for their party and essentially a deathknell for the GOP

It'd be a bloodbath. Could even potentially gain a 2/3rds majority to pass/repeal amendments.

But that wouldn't be as profitable as maintaining division and a neoliberal/crony capitalist economic system.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

It'd be a bloodbath. Could even potentially gain a 2/3rds majority to pass/repeal amendments.

But that wouldn't be as profitable as maintaining division and a neoliberal/crony capitalist economic system.

very true
that, and voters don't fund campaigns......which is why neolibs and neocons exist in the first place

We used to have pork barrel legislation as our worst legislative issue, now we have lobbyists literally writing bills and propositions, ridiculous

 

[Hard To Tell]

The most critical factor in deciding the outcome of an election is demographics. The Dems know this and are just hoping/waiting for whites to no longer be a big enough percentage for anyone else to stand a chance. 2020 might be too soon but in the meantime they will sure as hell try their best to speed up this process.

As for the ordinary working classes, these people (and their corporate sponsors and shills in the media and entertainment industry) hate your guts with a passion.

 

[n...not crazy]

We all know that regardless of nominee, the message will end up being a loud, platform-less "My Republican opponent is an asshole"

 

[Fawlty]

Can't knock the corporate dems for trying to both win the presidency and not garner too much working class support as to awaken the silent majority who could force the Democratic party to actually support the working class

This is where you lose me. That level of meticulous, devious intent is just unrealistic, and it's just not true (especially since the Bernie faction nudged Dems a little toward the working class a couple years ago).

 

[xcvbn]

That’s the reality for “progressive” politicians today. They have to go with tranny bathroom stuff or they get labeled “right winger” or “fake” progressive by progressives themselves.

Also even if we ignore the tranny bathroom stuff, progressive platform consists of radical changes that would lead to increased taxes, increased government spending/deficit, more n more government regulations/red tape...

Don’t think middle class wants these radical changes.

They're not progressive if they cave to the pressure of corporate dems.

And actually, yes, the working class wants the 1% to pay their fair share of taxes and to regulate wall street/big business.

Radically increased government spending/deficit- like the current policy and the policy of the past 5+ administrations? It remains to be seen if progressives are all talk regarding this but they certainly couldn't possibly be more hyproctical than their predecessors.

 

[xcvbn]

This is where you lose me. That level of meticulous, devious intent is just unrealistic, and it's just not true (especially since the Bernie faction nudged Dems a little toward the working class a couple years ago).

You're definitely right about them being nudged 'a little.' They are entirely reluctant to change despite the popularity and common sense of Sanders/progressive policies.

There are only so many reasons for that and they can be counted in donated dollars from wealthy interests that progressive policies would almost certainly hurt.

 

[Fawlty]

You're definitely right about them being nudged 'a little.' They are entirely reluctant to change despite the popularity and common sense of Sanders/progressive policies.

There are only so many reasons for that and they can be counted in donated dollars from wealthy interests that progressive policies would almost certainly hurt.

It was actually Clinton's proposal for the minimum wage ($12) that was the most popular iirc, just for the record. But yeah the energy brought out by Bernie had a positive effect. I don't know if it was so much a reluctance to change as it was the popularity of the ideas increased, and those ideas were incorporated responsibly into the platform by the Dem establishment, and that success is part of what motivated a wide range of candidates to do well in 2018.

I don't think there's as major of a problem in the Democratic Party with feeling beholden to corporate donors (this really seems over-confidently-stated by most people), I think it's more the lack of popular interest and motivation, and now that there is interest and motivation, the changes happen. Even without that Bernie energy though, the Democrats have been fighting this right-to-work union busting for a long time, and unfortunately, that broke apart in the Supreme Court, which lawmakers can't do anything about. They fight for health and safety regulations, fight against the plot to privatize Social Security, they fight for employer-provided healthcare, and just a really long list of things.

 

[xcvbn]

It was actually Clinton's proposal for the minimum wage ($12) that was the most popular iirc, just for the record. But yeah the energy brought out by Bernie had a positive effect. I don't know if it was so much a reluctance to change as it was the popularity of the ideas increased, and those ideas were incorporated responsibly into the platform by the Dem establishment, and that success is part of what motivated a wide range of candidates to do well in 2018.

I don't think there's as major of a problem in the Democratic Party with feeling beholden to corporate donors (this really seems over-confidently-stated by most people), I think it's more the lack of popular interest and motivation, and now that there is interest and motivation, the changes happen. Even without that Bernie energy though, the Democrats have been fighting this right-to-work union busting for a long time, and unfortunately, that broke apart in the Supreme Court, which lawmakers can't do anything about. They fight for health and safety regulations, fight against the plot to privatize Social Security, they fight for employer-provided healthcare, and just a really long list of things.

News to me that $12/hr is more popular than $15/hr among voters.

You still have fossil fuel companies, banks, pharma, health insurance, etc donating to Dems- do you really believe they do this out of the goodness of their hearts?

Clearly the DNC isn't nearly as bad as the GOP, as far as unbridled corruption and anti-democratic policy goes, but to suggest that there aren't dems beholden to major corporate interests is so incredibly disenguous and just plain wrong. The two major party leaders are wholly owned by special interests- Pelosi and Schumer.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I don't think there's as major of a problem in the Democratic Party with feeling beholden to corporate donors (this really seems over-confidently-stated by most people), I think it's more the lack of popular interest and motivation, and now that there is interest and motivation, the changes happen.

I get the sense that some people think that campaign finance is like personal money. It's literally just help winning elections. If you think that they'd win by huge margins if they forwent it, then it would make no sense at all for them to take it.

 

[ultramanhyata]

The only way your scenario will work is if they agree to some bipartisan deals. But they won't. They'll refuse to give into anything that may appear as a win for Trump. And Trump will use it against them to prove how useless establishment politicians are.

I like how this implies that Trump, the big "outsider", was constantly pushing for bi-partisan compromise during his first two years as president - as opposed to just letting the Freedom Caucus essentially write all the legislation.

 

[Daverisimo]

Bernie--light. I still prefer the original, but Brown's a good alternative. His being from Ohio is a huge plus strategically.

I just hope we don't get into a situation where Brown, Bernie, and Warren all run in the primary and split the progressive vote. For the love of God, I really don't want Booker, Biden, or Harris as the nominee (even though I do think Biden would be a guaranteed 2020 win for the Dems).

 

[Satsui Ryu]

If Democrats could comeback to the centre n have some rational centrist candidates they should win easily, however if they keep pandering to the far left fanatics, trump gets another 4

I dont understand this logic. People act like all Democrat candidates are green haired overweight psycho-feminists, but Hillary was criticized for being a neo-con more akin to Bush. I get the feeling we have a large portion of the population who gets their information from memes and not actually paying attention to actual policies and discussion and that is scarier than any politician can be.

 

[Fawlty]

News to me that $12/hr is more popular than $15/hr among voters.

You still have fossil fuel companies, banks, pharma, health insurance, etc donating to Dems- do you really believe they do this out of the goodness of their hearts?

Clearly the DNC isn't nearly as bad as the GOP, as far as unbridled and anti-democratic corruption goes, but to suggest that there aren't dems beholden to major corporate interests is so incredibly disenguous and just plain wrong. The two major party leaders are wholly owned by special interests- Pelosi and Schumer.

Corporations wouldn't have to be doing things out of the goodness of their hearts though. Even if they're just supporting Democrats because they believe in democratic political philosophy (which is maybe the purest motive), that's not out of the goodness of their hearts, that's a preference.

And if there was a strong relationship between donations and favorable legislation, the donations would be a lot more than what they are now. Compare capital investments to political investments. Clearly the political investments are not where the action is, there isn't much return. If the return was super high, the investment would increase.

I think it's a lot more dangerous to presuppose massive conspiracies without good evidence. In general I think all of this stuff is way overstated, the hatred for (and fear of) corporations is over the top. Not that I love corporate environments, greed, etc. I don't do well playing that game and I don't feel good playing it.

 

[ultramanhyata]

I get the sense that some people think that campaign finance is like personal money. It's literally just help winning elections. If you think that they'd win by huge margins if they forwent it, then it would make no sense at all for them to take it.

I am impressed by the indefatigable shilling you do here on behalf of the corporate donor class. You're like an NRA member but if guns were corporate lobbyists.