Op-Ed What does the current establishment Democrats stand for?

[Sausy]

Jay Rockefeller... his "et tu, Brute?" moment turning his back on the very thing he championed.. a public option. We're not supposed to let our dirty laundry out, according to some folks here. If they want to defend the party leadership, because a lot of people on the internet(who are looking from the outside in and have little power where it counts as is)are so critical(and rightfully so) of this out of touch, out of control corporate kissing entity known as the Democratic Party power structure.. you're welcome to it. I'm not here for making nice with the elites. When will they be held to account when they are in power, and all they want is to enjoy the fruits of their power and position? You can't go against them now and threaten the gravy train, being in power! Never.. that's when. I'm not looking for perfect leadership, btw.. obviously there isn't and never can be any such thing. But responsive, accountable leadership... hell yes.

When people you thought were looking out for the best interests of Americans betrays that trust, your own party leadership... fuck them all.

 

[rareboy]

To the OP:

If I were you. I'd be a hell of a lot more concerned about what the GOP stands for.

 

[Kulindahr]

To the OP:

If I were you. I'd be a hell of a lot more concerned about what the GOP stands for.

That's only a worry if the Democrats continue to stand for nothing except the status quo. Given that 89% of all Americans think corporations should be locked out of politics, that 72% want Congress to get off its collective ass and fix the interstate and US highway systems, and 68% support raising the upper tax brackets back to where they were before Bush, it shouldn't be hard for them to stand for something -- those three alone ought to be able to provide some landslide victories.

 

[Kulindahr]

Recent examples
1. Not breaking up already TBTF banks in Dodd-Frank
2. Dismantling public option in favor of mandated insurance or penalty in Obamacare
3. Not supporting importation of cheaper medicines from Canada
4. Lobbying for TransPacific Partnership
5. Hawkish foreign policy in the Middle East
6. Proposed cuts to Social Security thru chained CPI

There's a fairly simple change that could be made to Social Security that would go a long way to extending its solvency: stop the percentage raises for COLAs, and replace them with a COLA based on just the first 150% of the poverty level. That's just good sense because money above that isn't relevant to the cost of living; it's all bonus. So figure the COLA on that 150% of the poverty level, and give everyone that increase -- no more, no less -- and it would save a bundle.

 

[opinterph]

Recent examples
1. Not breaking up already TBTF banks in Dodd-Frank
2. Dismantling public option in favor of mandated insurance or penalty in Obamacare
3. Not supporting importation of cheaper medicines from Canada
4. Lobbying for TransPacific Partnership
5. Hawkish foreign policy in the Middle East
6. Proposed cuts to Social Security thru chained CPI

Of the 6 items you shared, hawkish foreign policy in the Middle East seems significantly less related to “deregulation, corporate welfare, and other regressive policies.”

 

[Julian89]

Of the 6 items you shared, hawkish foreign policy in the Middle East seems significantly less related to “deregulation, corporate welfare, and other regressive policies.”

Democrats, at least those who are Progressives, are supposed to be anti-war.

 

[Pierresro]

This American and his spouse also have dual citizenship with the UK and now live as residents of Valencia, Spain. Onbe of teh first countries in Europe that did not offer civil partner ships but marriage . We have a 130o Square foot apartment with 4 bedrooms 2 baths and a view to kill for. This Vet will never live in the USA again and wll probably never set foot there again while a repubican pig is in charge!

 

[Pierresro]

Jawja tells me all I need to know LOL Redneck Trump voter your choice!

 

[opinterph]

Jawja tells me all I need to know LOL Redneck Trump voter your choice!

It's more like a coin toss.

In the 2016 General Election, Donald Trump won Georgia by receiving 51% of the vote.

 

[opinterph]

Democrats, at least those who are Progressives, are supposed to be anti-war.

The nature of war has changed quite a lot since WWII and even since Vietnam. Technology combined with automation, such as flying robot killing-machines, makes some warfare situations closely resemble video gameplay. Massive troop movements are uncommon in the age of asymmetric warfare and most of the war actions are carried out by a very small percentage of the population. We don’t officially declare wars, because that would invite political criticism. We just “do” military actions and most people don’t seem to notice. In short, the American people are largely disconnected from the business of war. Of course, the reality is that the war machine never stops – even in times of relative peace. Our robots are aloft right now, protecting us from harm by operating in distant lands with invisible impunity. Any antiwar effort must somehow acknowledge these circumstances and adapt their approach in order to generate interest, supporters, and activists.

It is arguable that warfare (or the preparation for war) involves an economic issue and a corporate welfare issue. It is economic because the trillions of dollars that pour into the military could have very profound effects if some portion of those resources were diverted to the resolution of domestic issues.

Pitting social issues against economic issues when they should be indivisible, interrelated and interdependent have been the new mantra of the current Democratic Party.

How about pitting national security issues against economic issues?

Perhaps a reasonable antiwar talking point would suggest that warfare involves using the country’s resources to protect the interests of the global corporate elite rather than to solve domestic problems.

Are there other reasons Progressive Democrats should be antiwar?​

 

[Benvolio]

The nature of war has changed quite a lot since WWII and even since Vietnam. Technology combined with automation, such as flying robot killing-machines, makes some warfare situations closely resemble video gameplay. Massive troop movements are uncommon in the age of asymmetric warfare and most of the war actions are carried out by a very small percentage of the population. We don’t officially declare wars, because that would invite political criticism. We just “do” military actions and most people don’t seem to notice. In short, the American people are largely disconnected from the business of war. Of course, the reality is that the war machine never stops – even in times of relative peace. Our robots are aloft right now, protecting us from harm by operating in distant lands with invisible impunity. Any antiwar effort must somehow acknowledge these circumstances and adapt their approach in order to generate interest, supporters, and activists.

It is arguable that warfare (or the preparation for war) involves an economic issue and a corporate welfare issue. It is economic because the trillions of dollars that pour into the military could have very profound effects if some portion of those resources were diverted to the resolution of domestic issues.




How about pitting national security issues against economic issues?

Perhaps a reasonable antiwar talking point would suggest that warfare involves using the country’s resources to protect the interests of the global corporate elite rather than to solve domestic problems.

Are there other reasons Progressive Democrats should be antiwar?​

We are all anti war. Republican believe strength deters war. Liberals believe that strength encourages enemies to attack.

 

[Kulindahr]

We are all anti war. Republican believe strength deters war. Liberals believe that strength encourages enemies to attack.

No, liberals believe that excess strength encourages military adventurism.

G.W. Bush is "Exhibit A".

 

[Julian89]

To the OP:

If I were you. I'd be a hell of a lot more concerned about what the GOP stands for.

I have no expectations for the GOP. I am not a part of their electoral base. I do not expect them to fight for my interests.

 

[Julian89]

There's a fairly simple change that could be made to Social Security that would go a long way to extending its solvency: stop the percentage raises for COLAs, and replace them with a COLA based on just the first 150% of the poverty level. That's just good sense because money above that isn't relevant to the cost of living; it's all bonus. So figure the COLA on that 150% of the poverty level, and give everyone that increase -- no more, no less -- and it would save a bundle.

We need to go back to pre-JFK tax rates. Also reduce expenditures for military adventurism that never benefited common Americans but the oligarchic military-industrial complex (MIC).

 

[Julian89]

The nature of war has changed quite a lot since WWII and even since Vietnam. Technology combined with automation, such as flying robot killing-machines, makes some warfare situations closely resemble video gameplay. Massive troop movements are uncommon in the age of asymmetric warfare and most of the war actions are carried out by a very small percentage of the population. We don’t officially declare wars, because that would invite political criticism. We just “do” military actions and most people don’t seem to notice. In short, the American people are largely disconnected from the business of war. Of course, the reality is that the war machine never stops – even in times of relative peace. Our robots are aloft right now, protecting us from harm by operating in distant lands with invisible impunity. Any antiwar effort must somehow acknowledge these circumstances and adapt their approach in order to generate interest, supporters, and activists.

It is arguable that warfare (or the preparation for war) involves an economic issue and a corporate welfare issue. It is economic because the trillions of dollars that pour into the military could have very profound effects if some portion of those resources were diverted to the resolution of domestic issues.




How about pitting national security issues against economic issues?

Perhaps a reasonable antiwar talking point would suggest that warfare involves using the country’s resources to protect the interests of the global corporate elite rather than to solve domestic problems.

Are there other reasons Progressive Democrats should be antiwar?​

I agree. That's why the Democratic Party should focus on putting a platform that shows economic policies that will ensure No American will be Left Behind and stop asking for Assad's head. We have no business interfering in the affairs of other sovereign nations.

 

[opinterph]

declining median household incomes

What is the source of your information?

 

[MystikWizard]

Last year's primaries are over. Let's learn from that and move on. Whatever lessons we learned, let's bring them along to win our next battle in 2018 more so in 2020 where we should work hard to win the governors' mansions and state legislatures in time of the nationwide census.

My guess is that the DNC establishment will refuse to accept what happened last year and will still rely on and cater to big money corporate interests. Those that have power don't give it up easily.

The DNC will continue to simply have an "anti Trump" message with no platform of what they stand for ... and bank on the public being tired of Trump. They are hoping Democrats will go out in full force in next year's Mid Term elections based on an anti-Trump message alone.

If that is their plan, they are going to be in for yet another rude awakening.

 

[Benvolio]

What is the source of your information?

Since unemployment is at a long term low, it is reasonable to assume that the median income is higher as well. It is gratifying to notice how closely the higher levels of median income correlate to Republican control of congress, starting after the 1994 election, and responding catastrophically to the Republican loss in 2006.

 

[Julian89]

What is the source of your information?

... Homelessness still persists post-recession. But wait, there's more. As they say, pictures speak a thousand words.

Source:
Porter,M. E., Rivkin, J. W., Desai, M. I. and Raman, M. (2016). Problems Unsolved and a Nation Divided: The State of U.S. Competitiveness. MA: Harvard Business School. Retrieved from: https://www.scribd.com/document/324137454/Harvard-Study-on-US-Economy-Under-Obama

For your information and perusal.

 

[Julian89]

My guess is that the DNC establishment will refuse to accept what happened last year and will still rely on and cater to big money corporate interests. Those that have power don't give it up easily.

The DNC will continue to simply have an "anti Trump" message with no platform of what they stand for ... and bank on the public being tired of Trump. They are hoping Democrats will go out in full force in next year's Mid Term elections based on an anti-Trump message alone.

If that is their plan, they are going to be in for yet another rude awakening.

That's why we need to take our party back and make it the Progressive Worker's party that it was from the 1930s to 1970s. We need to be strategic. We need to Occupy the Democratic Party. We need to expunge it of the Big Money demons that are haunting it. Let us start from the county levels, up to the State levels until it reaches the Democratic National Committee. Let us run Progressives for primary from the school boards to county level positions, to the State level up to the Federal level. Of course, the Big Money Machine will be there attacking us but I am optimistic that if we will do it the old-school grassroots door-to-door combined with social media campaigns, we have the fighting chance to take over the Democratic Party. At the same time, we need to facilitate the registration of new voters and help them get thru the draconian suppressive ID laws imposed by right-wing State governments. Once we occupied and have taken back the Democratic Party, we will challenge the right-wingers of the Republican Party. We will not leave any county of this country not contested. We will give these "Screw you, I got mine" right-wingers the fight of their lives and with our progressive politics of Life, Dignity and Development for All, we will win.