Jump to content

2018 Democrats thread


southsider2k5
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 6/5/2018 at 1:34 PM, StrangeSox said:

reddy I remember you getting hyped about this guy at one point

 

 

 

Lol.  How are we going to pay for these things!!!

Schultz, my friend.  I have one idea.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, raBBit said:

I was asking you about your racism generalizations. I just think it's weird if you things go the way you want the country isn't racist and if they go awry for you than the country is racist.

But since you focused on debt, how is it a reason to excuse democrats and not republicans? Bush and and Trump are the only two republican presidents I remember. Trump is just republican in name and spends like I expect he would. Bush spends in a way that would have been historical if Obama didn't follow him up. They both spend, spend, spend. Expand your mind. This isn't partisan. This is a government wide disease. 

2duxjix.png

Dat derivative dough... (For reference, the pattern of it getting much larger during red and shrinking during blue...continued this year. But you didn't care when the Tax Cuts were being passed, we even kept asking where the deficit hawks were. No one, including you, cared when the Republicans doubled this year's deficit. )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever posters here think, it seems like the electorate has shown pretty clearly that they don't care about deficits or the debt beyond being vaguely mad at it. But it's not controlling their voting.

 

Which is why of course Democratic leadership announced they're going to reinstitute pay-go. Another winning political move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, raBBit said:

I've complained about it. That's been my leading point when people say I like Trump but I dont expect you to see every post.

So you think taxes should be higher, then? That makes sense, there are only two options to eliminate a deficit - raise revenues or reduce expenses - and the only expenses that could be reasonably reduced by the government right now are military expenditures, but even if they did that, it would be wiser to put those cost savings into social welfare programs than to just simply reduce the deficit, so the only truly wise thing to do would be to raise revenues by raising taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, re: the primaries, the establishment wins again and OR candidates get wrecked. Voters are supporting Dems regardless of their policy positions, and the distinctions are being overblown in the media.

Finkenauer blew away the results we were expecting. Dem voter turnout was up big. The wave is alive and well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, raBBit said:

No I don't think taxes should be higher not that you were asking in a genuine fashion. 

I would want to decrease costs significantly. Cut out the vast majority of foreign aid (looking at you Israel and Egypt). Past that, cut basically all foreign aid that's not fighting some pertinent disease/humanitarian concern.  Pull the plug on the vast majority of governmental programs that meet a certain threshold of overheard spending. Cut the vast majority of the military budget. Cut a significant chuck of welfare and and put some of the savings to use by taking the black helicopters the military is no longer using to bomb arab countries and have them drop endless supplies of birth control and condoms. 

I would want to decrease taxes but just in a different way than the plan that was implemented. I would also want to change the way taxes are billed and given individuals some sort of say towards where their tax dollars are going. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I would work with the IRS to add a line to the 1040 where Americans can add to their tax burden. It seems we have a lot of people who want higher taxes but don't know they can just pay the IRS more if they want. I think if we added the line to the 1040, you and others who want higher taxes have a way of doing so. 

No one wants to pay higher taxes. You know that as well as I do, because we work in the same field. That's why you have to have laws which require a certain amount of tax to be paid. Taxation is not theft, it's paying proportionately for your share of the costs associated with having a society, from which everyone benefits. Some benefit more than others, which is why progressive taxation makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Reddy said:

Yes the real news dot com

You’re making the point about progressives feeling marginalized or used by the party by dismissing it out of hand.

Just like Trump says the “real news” never gets out there about all the good he’s doing...a lot of the “behind the scenes/cigar-filled back rooms with white men only” important decisions on candidates are made NOT BY THE DEM PRIMARY VOTERS but ahead of time by the DCCC.

The article argues that the likes of Schumer and Emanuel winning elections...like 2006 in the case of Raha...has been followed up by all of those elected from that particular freshman class being wiped out later on (because many Dem’s are either sitting out those elections/disinterested in supporting moderate/centrist candidates), in this case the 2012 Tea Party wave election.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, raBBit said:

I've complained about it. That's been my leading point when people say I like Trump but I dont expect you to see every post.

Except when it actually mattered, you could have been calling your congressperson and you didn't care. Here's me pointing this out in the Financial thread, which I said multiple times in November and December when you and the other Republicans didn't care about the deficit exploding to over $1 trillion again.

On 11/15/2017 at 8:15 AM, Balta1701 said:
Face it folks, no one cares about this. Literally no one cares about the Deficit. You can see that here - the Republicans who were screaming in 2008 that $800 billion would utterly bankrupt us and would drive inflation wild haven't made a single post. They don't care about the deficit as long as it's not being created by Democrats cause then it's evil. No one cares about fairness or people paying their fair share. 

But what waste of time did you actually buy into? You bought into those bonuses as the one thing you felt important enough to share. The fact that corporate profits soared from that same company, not worth noting. So now I assume you'll play your typical game of "I was just sharing something that was interesting I didn't mean that was important" and pretend that we can't actually see which things you choose to share. 

On 1/2/2018 at 8:36 PM, raBBit said:

https://mobile.twitter.com/cnbc/status/9483...ctivity.Message

 

Southwest is giving all of its employees bonuses and upping their charitable donations after tax cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, raBBit said:

Balta you should go out in the real world and work with people because those bonuses mean something to them. Maybe you and the academic elite are to far removed from everyday America issues and $500 or $1000 doesn't mean anything to you but I am sure people who work for Southwest who don't have all your white privilege really appreciated the extra cash.

Furthermore, how do those people plan to retire? Usually they have a pension or 401k plan. How do those plans increase in value? How do increased profits, free cash flow and share buybacks affect share prices of stocks? How do pension and 401k plans do when stock prices go up?

Even if ALL SEVEN million families affected by ACA (NOT getting subsidies, rates rising dramatically in the indendent pools)...voted against the DEMS, you’re going to have tens of millions of families on the other side of the equation that will be losing coverage altogether due to affordability concerns, buying “cheap/no frills” policies they only find out later don’t really cover anything and then ALL those Americans with pre-existing conditions who are going to be infuriated to see their coverage denied OR rates rising 50-100% per year (if they’re lucky)...that’s the most popular piece of the ACA (along with parents keeping kids up to 25 or 26 on their family plans), and it’s going to be used as a cudgel over the head of the GOP in November.

And don’t think all those getting bonuses or small tax cuts (mostly middle class/upper middle class) aren’t all going to blame the Administration when their gas prices continue to increase because of global instability (that’s partially American-induced), and that consumers are going to be happy to be paying 25-50% higher costs for any good made with steel/aluminum.  Iowa soybean and pork farmers aren’t going to be fooled this time around when their markets have been lost to the Brazilians or Canadians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, raBBit said:

Balta you should go out in the real world and work with people because those bonuses mean something to them. Maybe you and the academic elite are to far removed from everyday America issues and $500 or $1000 doesn't mean anything to you but I am sure people who work for Southwest who don't have all your white privilege really appreciated the extra cash.

Furthermore, how do those people plan to retire? Usually they have a pension or 401k plan. How do those plans increase in value? How do increased profits, free cash flow and share buybacks affect share prices of stocks? How do pension and 401k plans do when stock prices go up?

Half of all Americans have nothing saved for retirement due to the financial pressures of everyday lifeEven Fox (Fake) News can't deny it, though they still suggest fairly out of touch with reality solutions. Since you brought up 401k balances going up, who's really the one out of touch with the reality of the average American today? Don't worry, I'll expect no response to this post just like there was no response to the last one. I take it as your acknowledgement that I'm right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You’re making the point about progressives feeling marginalized or used by the party by dismissing it out of hand.

Just like Trump says the “real news” never gets out there about all the good he’s doing...a lot of the “behind the scenes/cigar-filled back rooms with white men only” important decisions on candidates are made NOT BY THE DEM PRIMARY VOTERS but ahead of time by the DCCC.

The article argues that the likes of Schumer and Emanuel winning elections...like 2006 in the case of Raha...has been followed up by all of those elected from that particular freshman class being wiped out later on (because many Dem’s are either sitting out those elections/disinterested in supporting moderate/centrist candidates), in this case the 2012 Tea Party wave election.

 

 

I mean, they aren't winning elections, no one's supporting that movement, why shouldn't I dismiss it at this point? Did you see the results on Tuesday? OR and the "progressive" wing got routed. Even in Bernie-loving Iowa. 'Twas ugly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Reddy said:

I mean, they aren't winning elections, no one's supporting that movement, why shouldn't I dismiss it at this point? Did you see the results on Tuesday? OR and the "progressive" wing got routed. Even in Bernie-loving Iowa. 'Twas ugly.

I only need to look at a picture and hear him speaking a couple of time to tell you D’Allesandro was toast...

 

But it’s not just Pete. In nearly every contested Democratic primary this year, candidates are straining to sound like the Vermont senator. The party’s new crop of presidential hopefuls is already echoing his applause lines from 2016, threatening to remake the Democratic Party in Bernie’s disheveled image. What that means for Sanders’ voice in the national party—and his 2020 prospects—still remains to be seen.

Here in Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District, which spans from the state capital west to the Nebraska border and south to the Missouri one, and where six Democrats are vying for the opportunity to unseat Republican Rep. David Young, the progressive choir has made it difficult to distinguish the actual Bernie disciple. All six Democratic candidates are running on a policy agenda similar to Sanders’, and several also have more cash than D’Alessandro, a more compelling personal story to share with voters, or both.

“I think we’d all show up and probably vote the same,” said Eddie Mauro, a former teacher who now runs his own insurance firm and is one of the Democrats vying for the nomination. “If we had a chance to raise the minimum wage, we’re gonna vote to raise the minimum wage. If we had the chance to vote for single-payer health care, we’re all gonna vote for single-payer health care.”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/can-bernie-win-an-iowa-race-where-everybody-sounds-like-him.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reddy’s attitude on this is a compelling reason we likely see a Sanders/Warren 2020 ticket that once again threatens to split the party...all Clinton had to do was bring Sanders onto the “unification” ticket but we got Kaine jammed down our throats instead (due to Clinton campaign hubris).

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Reddy’s attitude on this is a compelling reason we likely see a Sanders/Warren 2020 ticket that once again threatens to split the party...all Clinton had to do was bring Sanders onto the “unification” ticket but we got Kaine jammed down our throats instead (due to Clinton campaign hubris).

Wouldn’t Harris and Sanders be better than Warren and Sanders? Or even someone other than Bernie as VP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Reddy’s attitude on this is a compelling reason we likely see a Sanders/Warren 2020 ticket that once again threatens to split the party...all Clinton had to do was bring Sanders onto the “unification” ticket but we got Kaine jammed down our throats instead (due to Clinton campaign hubris).

Doubt it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harris isn’t ready to be president yet...I could see her running, but she needs some more experience (especially with international affairs.)

 

The Republican plan to engineer a Red Wave reversal (especially in the Senate)...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/08/opinion/sunday/if-theres-a-red-wave-election-in-2018-this-will-be-why.html

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2018 at 11:44 PM, raBBit said:

Balta you should go out in the real world and work with people because those bonuses mean something to them. Maybe you and the academic elite are to far removed from everyday America issues and $500 or $1000 doesn't mean anything to you but I am sure people who work for Southwest who don't have all your white privilege really appreciated the extra cash.

Furthermore, how do those people plan to retire? Usually they have a pension or 401k plan. How do those plans increase in value? How do increased profits, free cash flow and share buybacks affect share prices of stocks? How do pension and 401k plans do when stock prices go up?

Thanks for agreeing with me. No one, including you, cares one iota about the deficit until a Demycrat gets in office. You just demonstrated it perfectly. Those bonuses and increased profits came directly from increasing the federal deficit by $500 billion this year alone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Harris isn’t ready to be president yet...I could see her running, but she needs some more experience (especially with international affairs.)

 

The Republican plan to engineer a Red Wave reversal (especially in the Senate)...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/08/opinion/sunday/if-theres-a-red-wave-election-in-2018-this-will-be-why.html

Lol to a Red Wave. 

Also, Harris will likely be VP at minimum because of CAs new position in the primaries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Harris isn’t ready to be president yet...I could see her running, but she needs some more experience (especially with international affairs.)

 

The Republican plan to engineer a Red Wave reversal (especially in the Senate)...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/08/opinion/sunday/if-theres-a-red-wave-election-in-2018-this-will-be-why.html

You don't need experience anymore. It's probably going to be Trump vs. Oprah remember?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oprah's HIGHLY UNLIKELY to run.

I would say the chances are greater than zero but less than 3%.   A LOT depends on what happens in the next 1 1/4 years, obviously.  I don't think she would be very well accepted at all by the progressive side of the Democratic Party, likely leading to a 3 way/divided national ticket (which would pretty much ensure a Trump victory in 2020.)

 

https://truthout.org/articles/henry-a-giroux-the-nightmare-of-neoliberal-fascism/The Nightmare of Neoliberal Fascism

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...