Social Obama’s blunt message for Democrats: ‘Toughen up’

[Blayt7hh]

I know he has in the past. Which makes the words he chose all the more interesting

How do you interpret it?

I was telling you what he meant and you don’t have to interpret it. He’s talking about accepting that other people will share other views, and if you believe in free speech you should support it even when unpopular opinions are being shared. It’s easy to stand up for free speech when you like the speech, the true test is when you don’t like it and still stand up for it

You made up like a villain fanfiction arc out of it.

 

[Confucamus]

Please, I hope someone besides jd becomes viable. And gavin gruesome is most likely going to be the dem nominee imo

Anybody who is a viable candidate to keep the modern Democratic party out of the White House is a good one,

 

[Islam Imamate]

One of my issues with the abundance idea is that by doing that you're basically going down the Republican rabbit hole. If you are going to do Abundance why not just vote Republican? They already campaign on those types of ideas. What I have trouble understanding is if you want things like affordable housing, public transit and renewable energy you cannot adequately rely on the private sector. So why play this game where you're for free market and for bureaucracy simultaneously? This is how Dems got into the mess they are in now.

This is a common objection that I think deeply misunderstands the Abundance argument. Republicans absolutely do not want to increase state capacity so as to facilitate ambitious infrastructure projects like public transit.

As for the private sector, there's a reason Florida and Texas have built more green energy than more liberal states and it's because they have less red tape. You can't rely on the private sector for everything but when its goals align with yours you shouldn't get in it's way.

 

[Darkavius]

This is a common objection that I think deeply misunderstands the Abundance argument. Republicans absolutely do not want to increase state capacity so as to facilitate ambitious infrastructure projects like public transit.

As for the private sector, there's a reason Florida and Texas have built more green energy than more liberal states and it's because they have less red tape. You can't rely on the private sector for everything but when its goals align with yours you shouldn't get in it's way.

I would agree with you can't rely on the private sector for everything. However, there are already ideas available to do things that to not play into the whole red tape argument. Public housing is needed there needs to be an update to The Faircloth Amendment. Things to help with energy and climate issues there is The Green New Deal. I think the part Abundance misses is they want to cut red tape but they want "limited" government involvement too. That's basically riding the fence on a decision. The reason Florida and Texas have more green energy is because they chose one side or the other.

I feel like we've gotten to this phase in life where we watch and act like government can't be efficient anymore when it can be but it decides not to be more often than not. At least from my understanding Abundance doesn't really create a true alternative to the issues today. Abundance reduces red tape but the people that have the ability to create after the red tape is removed still have the whole power and wealth issue that this country is fighting over. This is where Abundance falls short imo.

State capacity won't be increased because without government many states will be too poor to help their people even if you remove the red tape. If you go the red tape route Dems are just playing the Republican playbook. Instead, and I know this sounds crazy, but the true alternative is actually show government can get stuff done to show how inefficient privatization is in many areas.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I would agree with you can't rely on the private sector for everything. However, there are already ideas available to do things that to not play into the whole red tape argument. Public housing is needed there needs to be an update to The Faircloth Amendment.

The Abundance movementis in support of public housing but as they point because of the government's own rules its expensive and time consuming to build it which means voters become reluctant to fund it.

Things to help with energy and climate issues there is The Green New Deal.

Again the issue with trying to build green energy is that current rules make it costly and time consuming to build. People who are against green energy projects can even use environmental laws to sue these green energy initiatives to a halt.

I think the part Abundance misses is they want to cut red tape but they want "limited" government involvement too. That's basically riding the fence on a decision.

They don't though, they want the government to have more capacity to do things like build infrastructure. That's one of the core goals of Abundance.

The reason Florida and Texas have more green energy is because they chose one side or the other.

What do you mean?

I feel like we've gotten to this phase in life where we watch and act like government can't be efficient anymore when it can be but it decides not to be more often than not. At least from my understanding Abundance doesn't really create a true alternative to the issues today. Abundance reduces red tape but the people that have the ability to create after the red tape is removed still have the whole power and wealth issue that this country is fighting over. This is where Abundance falls short imo.

The point of Abundance is to explain why the government is inefficient not to argue against the government initiatives but to reform them so that they're more efficient and can do the things we want them to like build public transit.

They want to do what you're calling for, following through on promises to the people to deliver public goods, and that's why they're concerned with the bottlenecks that impede it.

State capacity won't be increased because without government many states will be too poor to help their people even if you remove the red tape. If you go the red tape route Dems are just playing the Republican playbook. Instead, and I know this sounds crazy, but the true alternative is actually show government can get stuff done to show how inefficient privatization is in many areas.

When I say "state capacity" I mean state as in the bureaucratic structures and organs of the government, not state as in the state of Florida. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[panamaican]

He's not saying anything that most rational people saw. More importantly, it's very relevant to why the Dems lost to Trump.

They're talking ideology and disregarding tangible results. No one cares about trans rights if their cost of living is going up. People are against racism but if their jobs aren't paying enough, fighting racism is a secondary concern. The Dems have been moralizing without producing the things people need. The ideological points come after the foundational stuff is addressed.

Meanwhile, MAGA has been doing the same thing. Moralizing without producing thing that the rank and file need. The rank and file don't need tax cuts for the wealthy. They need healthcare, better jobs, etc. The only redeeming feature out of that MAGA movement is their increased deportation messaging and efforts.

Even if you think it's the wrong solution, it is a solution that matches what their supporters want to see. The supporters believe illegal immigration is negatively affecting their lives. Increasing illegal immigrant deportations removes the problem of illegal immigrant competition for jobs, services, etc.

 

[Darkavius]

The Abundance movementis in support of public housing but as they point because of the government's own rules its expensive and time consuming to build it which means voters become reluctant to fund it.

Again the issue with trying to build green energy is that current rules make it costly and time consuming to build. People who are against green energy projects can even use environmental laws to sue these green energy initiatives to a halt.

They don't though, they want the government to have more capacity to do things like build infrastructure. That's one of the core goals of Abundance.

What do you mean?

The point of Abundance is to explain why the government is inefficient not to argue against the government initiatives but to reform them so that they're more efficient and can do the things we want them to like build public transit.

They want to do what you're calling for, following through on promises to the people to deliver public goods, and that's why they're concerned with the bottlenecks that impede it.

When I say "state capacity" I mean state as in the bureaucratic structures and organs of the government, not state as in the state of Florida. Sorry for the confusion.

I should probably approach this from a different angle. What is the point of removing the red tape if someone doesn't have much already? Removing red tape supports those who already have the resources. Something Republicans already run on now. To an extent haven't Republicans ran on that same kind of concept for the past 40 years? Explaining why government is inefficient leads to the Reagan and Trump's of the world.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Obama : “Stop looking for the quick fix. Stop looking for the messiah."

Translation -"I already had two terms."

 

[Islam Imamate]

I should probably approach this from a different angle. What is the point of removing the red tape if someone doesn't have much already? Removing red tape supports those who already have the resources.

It's the exact opposite, the red tape helps those with resources as they are the ones who are able to bear the costs of delays and fees.

Something Republicans already run on now. To an extent haven't Republicans ran on that same kind of concept for the past 40 years? Explaining why government is inefficient leads to the Reagan and Trump's of the world.

Republicans do not run on building green energy and public transportation, quite the opposite they frame those things as a waste of money.

Again when we talk about cutting red tape one of the main beneficiaries of this will be the government itself as it often subjects itself to far more regulation than the private sector making it costly and time consuming to build anything.

If you think building green energy, public transit, and housing are important then you should be in favor of the Abundance movement.

 

[koquerelle]

It's insane to me.

It is insane. They didn't learn a damn thing after the last election. They lost to a con man and they don't see why.

 

[HereticBD]

It is insane. They didn't learn a damn thing after the last election. They lost to a con man and they don't see why.

Some do.

One thing I do like about the left, is that they create real threats to their current leaders. There is a current civil war going on with the Dems right now, that is being woefully under-covered. The socialists are coming for their do nothing bitches. Granted, it won't be good for the party on a national level, but that's on the lazy ass gatekeepers that have treated them as useful idiots for the past decade. They've been watering this plant for quite a while. Now they get to see what fruit it bears...