There's an SC case in the pipeline on that. It's absolutely an issue.
Political pork getting killed has hurt as well, because it nationalized races.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NYT: Democrats: Our Brand Is Worse Than Trump
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Political pork getting killed has hurt as well, because it nationalized races.
Autodidact
Banned
If the Supreme Court rules the right way later this year, we might not have to worry about this for much longer.
Paradigms change, what was impossible a hundred years ago may be possible now. Automation in particular will open some doors but close others. Democratic goals should be based on universality of outcome, regardless of economic system.
What I'm referring to isn't about what's possible or no, it's about whether they're net positives- Rent Control being the prime example of "no, do not do this, it will do the opposite of what you want!" Their net effects aren't going to change (because people don't change) regardless of where they fall on the ideological and popularity spectrums.
Change is indeed a constant, but bad discarded ideas aren't going to un-rot themselves.
Yeah, but they'd have to start over from scratch. They've damaged perception of Pelosi so much over an extended period of time, just like they did to Hillary.
So what you are saying is that young people want hope. Except your enumerated list is basically pie in the sky stuff. All of us as democrats want this but know that it is not realistic.
jellies_two
Member
If the swing to dems in these two elections are equalled in 2018 there will be a big democrat majority as 70 republican districts are more blue than these are.
What's the problem, exactly?
What's the problem, exactly?
GillianSeed79
Member
Dems need to campaign on single-payer health care, $15 minimum wage, marijuana taxation and legalization, corporate welfare reform, tax reform, free community college, livable wages, etc. Campaigning on job creation won't move the needle and means jack shit, since Democrats' response to rural America's economic collapse has been lol just move to the city where jobs are instead of creating new job opportunities in rural areas.
Pelosi's practically a caricature sprung to life of Republicans' worst-polling attributes about the kind of opposition candidates they hate with a passion. Yes, Republicans will attempt to smear anyone that takes her place. No, I don't think the vilification will take hold as easily or take root as deeply as it did with a rich, botoxed middle-age liberal woman from California who speaks in haughty tones and debates in condescending partisan snips.
She's a good fundraiser, but if she believes in the party, she should be a good fundraiser with or without a seat at the head of the table. It might not be her fault that she plays so perfectly to all the traits that make Republicans' blood boil, but alas, she does. She has to acknowledge that and do her best to take that giant target painted on her and move it away from the party's head.
It's very hard to run on "Job Creation" with under 5% unemployment!
And you just can't snap your fingers and create permanent jobs in rural areas. The jobs are going away, in large numbers, and we can only cushion the blow.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
yeah the idea that the economic message Democrats think would be strong is "job creation and growth" is concerning to me, they should instead try and make the jobs not suck
That is so not pie in the sky stuff. Some states are moving to most of those things. Gawd, Dems need to stop starting from the compromised position. Ask for big things, take the smaller version that you actually wanted
Dude Abides
Banned
Pelosi's job is to keep her caucus in line, which she is good at. The GOP San Fran Nan attack strategy goes back to 2002. If you're going to blame one person for Dem losses in congress and everywhere else, blame Obama. He was the leader of the party for the past decade, not Pelosi.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
did you just casual sexism
Well, we can start by providing basic needs like good health care and clean water. If Democrats question if that's possible, then they have truly lost their way as a party.
wesleyshark
Banned
These things aren't impossible.
It's very realistic, many countries have it, many states have some of those and favorability for those measures are increasing, 10 years ago you would have said the same thing about legalized marijuana and gay marriage. Ultimately we get bogged down in the short term back and forth but these things will happen. Belief systems can resist but they can never actually win over actual results.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
I should switch to the Republican party when white nationalism goes out of style, these young liberals are making me crotchety.
Obamacare is pretty close.
Without cost reducing initiatives or incentives? Just foot the bill for wherever? When colleges can't use grants and price to attract students they'll just keep offering more and more programs (just like employers offered more and more benefits after FDR fixed wages). That makes costs rise even higher. Bad idea.
Worst economic stimulus ever. They're degree holders with high earning potential, why give them that free money when poor people need it even more. Way to fuck the little guy!
How much is massive? Like Bush investing in hydrogen? Remember how that went? Just let the market take care of it (it already has).
Too high. Also, tie it to PPP. There's a reason they call it a living wage ;;
We can just close this thread now, folks.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
Seriously, just scale up the subsidies and you get pretty close to 100%, what's the problem
Obamacare halved the percentage of people without healthcare and heavily expanded America's single-payer healthcare programs, the fact that you're dumb doesn't make that not a huge progressive success
The best way to do that would be to make them optional
TheLaughingStock
Member
Hey now...ranking at/near the bottom of countless metrics is pretty close. Add some more subsidies and you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between what other countries offer.
You said Universal Healthcare, not single-payer. The ACA got close to universal coverage and can be adjusted in a few relatively minor ways to close the gaps (primarily though deeper subsidies).
Yes for the most part the states that we as Democrats already carry.
Correct but we think of ourselves as being better than that. I mean there are white lies and outright lies. Trump is openely lying to the American people.
Ditto and 10 years from now many of these topics will be acceptable at the national level. I am not saying that they are impossible to achieve but that it will take more than two terms to get there.
therealist
Member
This is due to complacency and arrogance. How many times last year did people say that the Republican party was dead and that the demographics of this country would mean that the Dems will never lose another presidential election again. How cocky and pretentious do people have to be in order to say that. Yet this was the general sentiment among liberals living in echo chambers like big cities and California. This is why Hillary lost. She believed that and didn't try to understand the pulse of the electorate.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
too bad the electorate is the minority of the country
Phoenix RISING
Banned
I remember about this time last year when GAF was salivating over the looming destruction of the Republican party.
Life is funny tho.
Life is funny tho.
The biggest problem with the ACA is how it can be sabotaged 50 different ways. If that's what it took to pass Supreme Court review, so be it, but it was built on on a flawed foundation and it either dies by a thousand cuts or one fell swoop.
Christ no, I wouldn't deny the benefits it has brought but how do you force insurers to the table?
Autodidact
Banned
You don't. Pass the public option that we should've had in the first place. Insurers withdraw from bumfuck areas, those people buy health insurance from the government, and boom, you have stealthy single payer.
Lord Fagan
Junior Member
She can "do her thing" in retirement. What do you think Bill Clinton has been doing for the last 17 years?
It's hard to pass laws that can't be sabotaged or destroyed by people who are willing to hurt the people who elected them.
Most of America lives in big cities, big cities have a better standard of living and produce almost all of America's economy.
The people living in rural towns are the ones living in echo chambers. Cities are the real America.
Phoenix RISING
Banned
If only ppl with this attitude realized that the Electoral College and senate level the playing field....
Dems should've never boycotted FoxNews. That kind of strategy just lets the other party win.
If anything Stewart's shows made people even more cynical especially with his segments exposing godawful Pelosi
If anything Stewart's shows made people even more cynical especially with his segments exposing godawful Pelosi
Hey, it's not my fault our system is rigged to give an minority cabal of unelected rural elites control over our government. All I'm trying to do is get the real Americans to wake up and take our democracy back.
They don't "level the playing field", they systematically disenfranchise millions of Americans.
hydragonwarrior
Member
Yeah same for Bernie and what Obama should have been doing too but he too was probably thinking Hillary would win.
Well, obviously that's what that guy means. The playing field is only level if rural whites have a huge advantage. They have so many cultural and structural problems they need affirmative action at the government level to compete.
Right, and how do you overcome that? Republicans have been trying to break Social Security and Medicare for generations, but they are robust, universally popular systems that no one has had the political capital to effectively destroy. Democrats designed the ACA on the tacit acceptance of an industry that had its knives out for it since day one.
Shadow Puppetry
Member
Derr hurr, dun want poor people unlike Killary!
President Trump touted his economic adviser Gary Cohn at an Iowa rally Wednesday night, praising the Goldman Sachs alum for his management of the economy despite Trump's history of attacking former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton over her ties to the company during the 2016 election.
"We have Gary Cohn, who is the president of Goldman Sachs," Trump told the crowd, pointing to Cohn in the front. "He's the president of Goldman Sachs. He had to pay $200 million dollars in taxes to take the job, right?" Trump continued. "So, somebody said 'Why did you appoint a rich person to be in charge of the economy?'"
"I said, 'because that's the kind of thinking we want,'" Trump added. "Because they're representing the country. They don't want the money, they're representing the country."
"And I love all people, rich or poor," Trump added. "But, in those particular positions, I just don't want a poor person, does that make sense?"
President Trump touted his economic adviser Gary Cohn at an Iowa rally Wednesday night, praising the Goldman Sachs alum for his management of the economy despite Trump's history of attacking former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton over her ties to the company during the 2016 election.
"We have Gary Cohn, who is the president of Goldman Sachs," Trump told the crowd, pointing to Cohn in the front. "He's the president of Goldman Sachs. He had to pay $200 million dollars in taxes to take the job, right?" Trump continued. "So, somebody said 'Why did you appoint a rich person to be in charge of the economy?'"
"I said, 'because that's the kind of thinking we want,'" Trump added. "Because they're representing the country. They don't want the money, they're representing the country."
"And I love all people, rich or poor," Trump added. "But, in those particular positions, I just don't want a poor person, does that make sense?"
I mean, the ACA has as much political capital as Medicaid. Do you think Medicaid was poorly implemented?
Well, Medicaid is titled under the Social Security Act and had fairly specific goals and guidelines, so in that way, yes, I think it was more sucessfully implemented. Making it work more effectively with the ACA is another ball of wax. Using Medicaid to end-around traditional insurance through the ACA appears ambiguous, in messaging and legal status.
Move left you, sniveling centrist cowards. Way the heck left. Lay out concrete leftist proposals of "here's how we're actually going to make your life better" and maybe people will bite.
Or just go ahead and be pro-choice Republicans and lose every election forever. You fucking ghouls.
Or just go ahead and be pro-choice Republicans and lose every election forever. You fucking ghouls.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
Is this a joke post? Hillary was the Obama protege. That's what all the complaints about coronation were about.
excelsiorlef
Member
Frustrated_me
Member
My word, the worst thing is he'll get away with all this.
Just imagine Obama said something like this. Just imagine.