29
   

Why I left the Democratic Party

 
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 09:54 am
@edgarblythe,
Ok. I don't want to get into it too much with you. For me, this left vs. more left war is distracting and dangerous. I read some history, mostly historical novels, anyway, in most of the wars back then with England and Scotland/Wales/Ireland, the problem they had in Scotland and the rest was infighting so to speak instead of focusing together on the enemy. I know you fundamentally disagree and I am ok with that.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:01 am
@revelette1,
I am trying to warn people that "our side" is colluding with our enemy.
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:32 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

It is well known he would run if nominated.


Hahahahaha. He has to run, in order to be nominated. It doesn't work the other way around. Also, I don't think I've seen him say he would be running.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:35 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

I am trying to warn people that "our side" is colluding with our enemy.


No, they are not.

The 'enemy' (hate that term for people who are my neighbors and family members) are people who would vote for things that you don't want to see happen. Those people are not the democrats in congress, none of whom are required to work in lockstep with your far left views, which have the support of maybe 15% of the country.

Your line of thinking is why we lost out on the possibility of a liberal leaning Supreme Court for the first time in decades.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:37 am
@edgarblythe,
If I have understood you for the last two years, the problem is special interest and election money needed to get into office and stay there and how that interferes with the left wing agenda. I am not sure how that can be helped without disarming ourselves. I can understand how you can use less money, Bernie's campaign and even Obama's first campaign shown the way, Trump as well didn't spend a lot of money. I am not sure it would work for everyone like unknown up and coming people who have never run for office in their lives would need some kind of backing which takes money; not everyone in backwards states and counties checks out politics on the internet.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:44 am
@revelette1,
As was pointed out in the video I posted this morning, politicians of either party jump to the donors' tune. If we can't break this cycle it doesn't matter much which party is elected. As we see with DACA, Democrats are not fighting very hard at all, because big money is putting a brake on them.
maporsche
 
  4  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:46 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

As was pointed out in the video I posted this morning, politicians of either party jump to the donors' tune. If we can't break this cycle it doesn't matter much which party is elected. As we see with DACA, Democrats are not fighting very hard at all, because big money is putting a brake on them.


"It doesn't matter much which party is elected."

Says that man who wonders why things like Sandy Hook continue to happen with no changes (the democrats must get a TON of cash from the NRA, huh?) or why the Supreme Court leans right and we get these 5-4 decisions on cases like Heller or Citizen's United.

Doesn't matter much at all...
revelette1
 
  3  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:53 am
@edgarblythe,
Forgive me, but how do you figure democrats are not fighting hard for DACA? What haven't they done that they should have? How do you know big money put the brakes on them? Do you have proof of what you say?
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:54 am
@revelette1,
Money to get into office is not my big worry. It's money after one is in office that corrupts so badly.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:57 am
@revelette1,
I'm right now working off the Young Turks video. I won't do others' searches to prove my point, which gets proven daily by the lack of results.
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 10:59 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

I'm right now working off the Young Turks video. I won't do others' searches to prove my point, which gets proven daily by the lack of results.


In summary, he has no evidence and can't be bothered to have an opinion other than someone else's, which he already posted and expects us to refer to from now on.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 12:18 pm
@edgarblythe,
He is a little long winded and biased for my taste. (young turk) Anyway, he said he was going by a politico piece where democrats conceded on the dreamers. (I think?) Anyway, I looked up Politico. Friday is not here yet and they are not finished or conceded anything yet.

Quote:
ACA-shutdown talks still stalled after Kelly meets with Dems

House Democrats left a meeting with top White House officials Wednesday seemingly no closer to reaching a deal on immigration or government funding before a critical Friday deadline.

Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus said their hour-long meeting with White House Chief of Staff John Kelly was “positive” — a dramatic change in tone from their contentious encounters with him in the past — but mostly a rehashing of talking points that doesn’t bring the two sides closer to an agreement.

“I didn’t get a sense that the administration has a clear bottom line that get us to where we need to be, certainly by [Jan.] 19,” Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) told reporters after the meeting. “The problem here is we had a cordial conversation. But we don’t need a cordial conversation, we need a substantive conversation.”

A deal to protect undocumented immigrants brought here as children isn't necessarily needed to keep the government open past Friday. House Republicans have passed the past two short-term spending bills on their own, and vulnerable Democrats in the Senate — where at least nine Democratic votes are needed — have not indicated they would be willing to shut the government down over the issue.

Still, House Republicans have had more difficulty rounding up votes on their side this time, with both conservatives and defense hawks loath to vote for another spending stopgap, the fourth such measure since September.

Democrats in the meeting advocated for a bipartisan House bill from Reps. Will Hurd (R-Texas) and Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) that would offer a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and increase border security. At least 50 lawmakers, equally divided between Republicans and Democrats, have signed on in support of the bill.

“I’m more positive than ever before,” said Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.). “The way I believe forward is for Democrats to say very clearly, ‘We want to give you your border security, please give us our Dreamers.’”

“I’m more positive than ever before,” Rep. Luis Gutierrez said following the meeting.

But Kelly hadn’t heard of the proposal, though he promised to look into it and even suggested the president would sign the bill “if that’s the best we can do,” according to Democrats in the meeting.

The group also discussed the Senate’s bipartisan immigration proposal, to be formally rolled out later Wednesday. But the plan has already drawn fire from the liberal CHC members who met privately with Kelly, and it faces deep resistance from the White House.

The legislation would create a new, 12-year pathway to citizenship for young undocumented immigrants who had entered the United States by June 15, 2012. Dreamers, however, would get up to two years of credit toward those 12 years if they had already obtained a DACA permit.

To try and satisfy Trump’s border security demands, the group is proposing roughly $1.6 billion in planning and constructing a barrier along the southern border, along with just over $1.1 billion for technology-oriented and other security measures.

The proposal would also make changes to family-based migration and the diversity visa lottery, proposals a majority of House Democrats have said they’re firmly against.

The initial group of six senators is working to entice more Republicans and Democrats to sign on. But Cornyn, the second-ranking Senate Republican and member of the No. 2 group, tweeted Wednesday morning that the deal would not be voted on and urged lawmakers to “go back to the drawing board.”

White House legislative director Marc Short, who accompanied Kelly to the CHC meeting Wednesday, told reporters on Tuesday afternoon that it was not “insubstantial” that the group at least addressed Trump’s core demands: a DACA fix, border security, the visa lottery and family-based immigration laws.

But on specifics, “some of the border security measures came with significant limitations and I think if you look at the chain migration proposal, we’re looking to fix chain migration across the board,” Short added. “That’s what the president talked about.”

In the CHC meeting, Democrats said they implored Kelly and his aides to stop using the term “chain migration,” a term minority lawmakers say is an offensive way to describe family reunification policies. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Chairwoman Judy Chu (D-Calif.) also attended the meeting.
No one brought up Trump’s controversial comments last week describing certain nations as “shithole countries,” in order to ensure the meeting remained civil, CHC members said.

Kelly was seen meeting with a group of pro-immigration Republicans, including Hurd and Reps. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), after his huddle with Democrats.

House Republicans unveiled a short-term bill Tuesday night that would fund the government through Feb. 16 coupled with policy sweeteners — including long-term funding for a children’s health program and a delay of certain Obamacare taxes — meant to attract Democratic votes.

Conservatives say Republican leaders do not have enough votes to pass the bill in the House.

But CHC members left the meeting saying they remain committed to voting against a government spending bill if there isn’t a DACA agreement by Friday.

“We’re very clear that the clock is ticking,” said CHC Chairwoman Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-N.M.).


Politico

The thing to do rather than dissing democrats wholescale, is to look up those nine vulnerable democrats and see how they vote or if they stand with the rest of the democrats on any showdown.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  0  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 01:24 pm
@edgarblythe,
Establishment Democrats fight progressives dirtier than they fight the GOP.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 01:32 pm
If the Dems ok a border wall -
maporsche
 
  4  
Reply Wed 17 Jan, 2018 01:54 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

If the Dems ok a border wall -


You realize that the minority party will need to compromise in some way if they hope to get a solution to the DACA problem, right?

That's going to likely mean increased border security, but with a lawful, legal solution including citizenship for these people.

What do you expect when progressives can't win elections across the country (but can sabotage others).
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Thu 18 Jan, 2018 08:11 am
@edgarblythe,
Like maporsche said more or less, you have to give something in order to get something in negotiations, it's how negotiations work.

Besides, I never really thought the wall would actually be built, it is really just not a practical solution. Probably why Kelly said Trump wasn't going to build it, but Trump went and tweeted he was..
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 18 Jan, 2018 08:16 am
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:
Probably why Kelly said Trump wasn't going to build it, but Trump went and tweeted he was..
Kelly didn't say he wasn't going to build it.
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Thu 18 Jan, 2018 08:44 am
@layman,
Quote:
White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly told Democratic lawmakers Wednesday that some of the hard-line immigration policies President Trump advocated during the campaign were “uninformed,” that the United States will never construct a wall along its entire southern border and that Mexico will never pay for it, according to people familiar with the meeting. 


WP

Ok, Kerry said the US was never going to build a wall along it's entire southern border.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Jan, 2018 08:49 am
@revelette1,
Democrats advance one increment while losing two.
revelette1
 
  4  
Reply Thu 18 Jan, 2018 09:00 am
@edgarblythe,
I understand your position and I respect it and you and who knows, perhaps your all or nothing approach serves a purpose and may one day beat out the democrats. If it does, I'll vote for whoever stands the winner on the left as I agree with them the most.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 05:19:46