29
   

Why I left the Democratic Party

 
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 06:46 am
“We cannot negotiate with people who say what's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable."

[ The Berlin Crisis: Radio and Television Address to the American People (The White House, July 25, 1961)]”
― John F. Kennedy

Or, you can just hand them your goodies on a platter.
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 07:29 am
@edgarblythe,
It seems to me what we might gain in DACA is taken away with other issues in the ideas the WH is floating in immigration reform. I don't think the democrats should agree with it if it like it is explained in the following link from Vox.

The immigration deal Trump’s White House is floating, explained

Quote:
Those reports say that the administration is willing to allow 1.8 million unauthorized immigrants who came to the country as children to become legal residents and ultimately apply for US citizenship — including the 690,000 beneficiaries of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, as well as others who would have been eligible for DACA but did not apply — in exchange for a $25 billion fund for its wall on the US/Mexico border; reallocating slots currently given to immigrants via the diversity visa lottery on the basis of “merit”; and preventing people from sponsoring their adult children, or siblings to immigrate to the US.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 08:06 am
And you think it's a great deal?
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 08:25 am
@edgarblythe,
No actually I don't think it is a good deal which is why I said I don't think the democrats should accept it. Any deal with those conditions in place would be unfair to immigrants not included in DACA.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 10:18 am
@revelette1,
Which immigrants would it be unfair to, and how would it be unfair to them?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 10:39 am
@revelette1,
Sorry. I am so conditioned to your disagreeing with me, I misread your post.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 01:31 pm
Social Security Works was live.
January 24 at 1:18pm ·
We thought it couldn't get any worse than Tom Price but it most certainly has. The Senate is about to vote on Alex Azar, to be our new Health Secretary. Azar has spent his entire career advocating for policies that prioritize PROFITS OVER PEOPLE. The American people need a Health Secretary that will fight for them not someone who will fight to line his Big Pharma friends' pockets.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I haven't read a breakdown of possible yea or nay votes. I hope no
Democrats vote for him.

Edit: Yep six Democrats supported this person. It's beyond disgusting.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 01:40 pm
@revelette1,
Notice how you guys keep forgetting to use the term illegal immigrant. Do you not think there is such a thing?
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 01:56 pm
@Baldimo,
There are so many stupid laws against immigrants the term has lost relevance.
edgarblythe
 
  0  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 02:06 pm
As much as I enjoy being mean to Democrats who insist on losing, their way -- destroying the party, alienating every potential ally under, or recently exited, their big tent -- Ted Rall always tops me.


Leftists want to change the world. They want peace, equal income, equal wealth, equal rights for everybody.

Democrats are not part of the Left. If Democrats have their way, the fundamental inequality of American capitalism, a system in which 1% of the people “earn” 82% of the income, will never change. Democrats apply identity politics as a distraction in lieu of systematic solutions to class-based discrimination. Democrats demand more women directors in Hollywood, more African-Americans admitted to Ivy League schools, transgendered soldiers in the military so they can join the slaughter of brown people in other countries.

Donald Trump represented a rare opportunity for the Left. After eight years of fascism with a smile, the American system got a figurehead as visually and tonally repugnant as its foreign policy (drones, aggressive wars, coups, undermining popular elected leaders) and its domestic reality (widespread poverty, crumbling infrastructure, no social safety net, for-profit healthcare and education). “Hey,” the Left could finally say, “the U.S. is a disgusting monster headed by a disgusting monster. Let’s get rid of that monster!”

It has become painfully apparent that Democrats have hijacked the anti-Trump Resistance.

This is going to really sting, Donkeys.

Definition of revolution: “a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system.”

At those very same marches, however, (establishment Democratic) speakers like Nancy Pelosi and Kirsten Gillibrand urged women to run for office (presumably as Democrats) and to support Democratic candidates (whether they’re women or men). Even if you think that is a beautiful and important idea, it is not revolution.

Running for office and validating the status quo by voting for major-party candidates is the exact opposite of revolution.

It gets worse in more specific ways from there, so if you're not already a Resister grinding your teeth -- or a Revolutionary nodding your head -- go ahead and click over and finish.

But maybe you already dismissed Rall along time ago. If so, then you won't care what Ryan Grim and Lee Fang at The Intercept wrote about the DCCC's debacle in PA-16 as a microcosm of the problem, either. The excerpt following doesn't do justice to the depth of the festering neoliberal cancer that has metastasized nationwide.

Christina Hartman, by the Democratic Party’s lights, did everything right during the last election cycle. She worked hard, racking up endorsements from one end of the district to the other. She followed the strategic advice of some of the most sagacious political hands in Pennsylvania, targeting suburban Republicans and independents who’d previously voted for candidates like Mitt Romney, but were now presumed gettable.

“For every one of those blue-collar Democrats [Donald Trump] picks up, he will lose to Hillary [Clinton] two socially moderate Republicans and independents in suburban Cleveland, suburban Columbus, suburban Cincinnati, suburban Philadelphia, suburban Pittsburgh, places like that,” Ed Rendell, the state’s former governor and titular leader of the state party, had predicted to the New York Times.

Hartman, with the energetic support of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and EMILY’s List, used her fundraising prowess to go heavy on television ads to drive her moderate message, confident that the well-funded Clinton ground game would bring her backers to the polls.

It did not.

Hartman was swamped by Smucker by 34,000 votes, badly underperforming even Clinton, who lost the district by about 21,000 votes. Trump and Smucker had indeed picked up some blue-collar Democrats, but not enough Republicans switched over to make up for the loss.

After spending $1.15 million in 2016, she had finished with 42.9 percent of the vote. In 2014, a terrible year for Democrats, a little-known Democrat spent just $152,000 to win almost the same share, 42.2 percent of the vote.

In July, Hartman announced she would make another run at it in 2018.

She quickly found the support of the state’s Democratic establishment, led by Rendell. “I’m proud to support her run for Congress in 2018. With her track record of success, we can count on Christina Hartman to show up for the people of PA-16 and to be part of the solution to end Washington gridlock,” Rendell said.

Along with Rendell came failed 2016 Senate candidate Katie McGinty ...

And on it goes. Down With Tyranny (you won't like this, either, establishment Dems):

If you've been paying any attention since around 2006 or so, DWT has been blasting away at how the DCCC, and the Democratic establishment in general, rigs primaries against progressives in favor of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party -- Blue Dogs, New Dems, "ex"-Republicans, self-funders, anti-choice freaks, homophobes... the whole panoply of candidates who make voters scratch their heads and say "what's the difference?" Nothing deflates turnout from the Democratic base like the DCCC and EMILY's List and associated groups offering a lesser-of-two-evils strategy. It doesn't work, but the DCCC is incapable of learning the lesson. Sure, their **** candidates can be sometimes swept into office -- as they were in 2006 -- but in the next midterm they are invariably swept back out of office (as they were in 2010) when Democratic voters realize they've been tricked -- and stay home in droves.

[...]

The DCCC still blatantly lies about not getting involved in primary battles. They do it every day and in every way. And the whole purpose is the kill progressives in the cradle. Their own Red to Blue website currently lists 18 crap candidates they are backing, almost all of them also backed by the New Dems and/or the Blue Dogs and almost all of them in hot races with progressives. As Grim and Fang reported, "the Democratic Party machinery can effectively shut alternative candidates out before they can even get started. The party only supports viable candidates, but it has much to say about who can become viable."

Look for the Emily's List-endorsed candidate in a Congressional race, and more often than not you'll find a conservative, corporate Democrat ready to blow lots of cash and lose. (In TX-07, that candidate is Lizzie Pannill Fletcher.) The DCCC claims neutrality using the same reverse psychology that Ajit Pai and Ted Cruz do with regard to the Internet.

In Texas, where everything -- especially the Democrats' losing streak -- is bigger, over the past quarter century Team Blue has managed to nominate bold progressives (LMAO) like Victor Morales, Gene Kelly, Ron Kirk, Paul Sadler, and David Alameel for the US Senate; and Tony Sanchez, Chris Bell, Bill White, and Wendy Davis for governor. In 2018 the Democrats' nominees are once more being pre-selected well in advance, and strictly on the basis of how much money they have raised, by the corporate media and party and labor bosses.

Pass. Not falling for that banana in the tailpipe thing again.

Sadly, it gets worse. Case in point: even with every single card in the deck already stacked against her, US Senate candidate Sema Hernandez has attracted a crew of Resistance smear merchants working overtime.



You'll need to click on these to read them clearly.









I have about 15 more screenshots of this thread. I like to know who my enemies are.

So let's review. If you're the kind of Democrat ...

-- That thinks Russia hacked the election (nope, still no proof);

-- That wants to see Trump impeached (ain't hap'nin' unless you flip the House and Senate, and that ain't hap'nin' if you're spending all your time hating on Bernie Sanders and all of his supporters who #DemExited last November;

-- Thinks a "deeply, personally" pro-life elder in his Presbyterian church -- which harshly condemns homosexuality and gay marriage -- who sees no conflict in his personal views and how he might govern; who holds no experience in government save being the son of a former governor (but does have the ability to self-fund his race) is a front runner for the 2018 gubernatorial nomination;

-- That supports a three-time loser running for TX-07 who still doesn't live in the district, and still proudly supports fracking ...

-- That thinks hosting Nancy Pelosi as keynote speaker for the county party's most important fundraiser was a great idea;

-- That is making excuses for Chuck Schumer, et. al. as they leave DREAMers twisting in the wind again, and again, rather holding on to that silver lining ...

... then you're part of the Resistance. Or as some call it, the McResistance.

I'm still going to give your nasty party one more chance this year ... despite the fact that you pretty much hate me and everybody who thinks like me. But those second chances have breaking points.

And without something on the order of 10-15% of your former base vote, you're probably not flipping anything in November except your wig. Again. You gonna blame Jill Stein and the Green Party for that? Again?
Posted by PDiddie at Friday, January 26, 2018

http://brainsandeggs.blogspot.com/
maporsche
 
  6  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 02:10 pm
@edgarblythe,
https://i.stack.imgur.com/4RK6O.jpg
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 02:23 pm
@edgarblythe,
Which stupid laws are those, that fact that we have immigration laws and not open borders?

Please tell me which laws you think are stupid?
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 02:24 pm
@edgarblythe,


The Azar vote, who to remember down the road.


Carper of Delaware
Coons of Delaware
Donnelly of Indiana
Heitkamp of North Dakota
Jones of Alabama ( didn't take him long to display his Alabamian style beliefs )
Manchin of West Virginia
also King of Maine, an Independent


Bob Corker did not vote

Rand Paul the Kentucky Republican voted Nay
Carper is running for reelection this year as are Manchin, Donnelly and Heitkamp
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 02:26 pm
@Baldimo,
Most of them. Take your pick.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 03:06 pm
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/phony-daca-resistance-funds-u-s-war-machine/
The top Democrats in Congress have transformed DACA, the effort to protect 800,000 childhood immigrants from deportation, into a gargantuan funding measure for the Pentagon. This past weekend, Senate Democratic leader Charles Schumer offered to fully fund Donald Trump’s border wall and boost defense spending “far above” what the White House requested, in a deal to end the government shutdown. The military budget signed into law in December was already $30 billion higher than the White House asked for, and $80 billion bigger than the previous year’s war spending—an increase as large as Russia’s entire defense budget.

It is Democratic congressional leadership—not Donald Trump and his mad generals—that has been the driving force in this year’s military spending insanity. Back in July, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi pressured her party to back a defense authorization $57.4 billion bigger than the Pentagon requested. Only a minority of Democratic House members supported the measure, but a majority of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) followed Pelosi’s lead—including all five of the newest members of the Black Caucus, elected in 2016. By inflating the war budget even beyond the Pentagon’s demands, these Pelosi-Schumer-CBC Democrats ensured that what remains of the social safety net will be slashed into oblivion by bipartisan forces of austerity in future Congresses.

The Bernie Sanders faction of the Party is just as guilty, through its shameful silence on war. This group includes Our Revolution, whose purportedly “progressive” agenda suggests only that they would “take a hard look at the Pentagon’s budget and the priorities it has established.”

The imperial fist is inexorably crushing the domestic welfare agencies of government. The Democrats’ task in this infernal process is to coax their constituents to swallow the “Satan’s Sandwiches” that emerge from Congress—as suggested by Black Kansas City Rep. Emanuel Cleaver back in 2011, when Barack Obama was presenting his “Grand Bargain” to the Republicans. Having put “all entitlements” on the table for cutting at the start of his presidency, Obama proceeded to wage expensive wars against seven countries. His Grand Bargain offered even larger social cuts than the Republicans demanded, before finally unraveling in the morass of Capitol Hill. Democratic leadership is still seeking that “bargain” with the GOP, knowing full well that it will be paid for by more austerity for people’s programs.

ADVERTISEMENT


The result is both predictable and intended: the military budget expands to consume ever greater proportions of federal “discretionary” spending—that is, moneys not locked into mandated programs like Social Security. Finally, the public is told there is “no choice” but to tap into Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare—as Obama signaled at very the beginning of his presidency, and attempted to pull off in his first term in office.

Schumer and Pelosi have been throwing money at the Pentagon with abandon this year because both wings of the War Party (Democrat and Republican) are anxious to maintain the momentum of Obama’s global military offensive, after the unexpected defeat of the reliable warmonger, Hillary Clinton. That’s why, measured in military dollars, the Democratic leadership is more warlike than the Trump administration. Not trusting Trump to keep the pressure on Moscow, Beijing and any other “threat” to U.S. hegemony, the bipartisan political servants of empire flood the Pentagon with money and poison the political discourse with Russiagate. Although there are clear conflicts within the U.S. ruling class, in general the Lords of Capital appear at this juncture to be more concerned with terrorizing the world than maintaining domestic peace. Schumer and Pelosi were instructed, accordingly.

The Democrats’ cynicism is boundless. DACA, which has great political value to a key constituency but no monetary price tag, becomes the excuse to funnel additional tens of billions to the Pentagon—on top of previous increases—while enhancing Democratic election prospects in 2018 and 2020.
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 03:09 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

The Bernie Sanders faction of the Party is just as guilty, through its shameful silence on war. This group includes Our Revolution, whose purportedly “progressive” agenda suggests only that they would “take a hard look at the Pentagon’s budget and the priorities it has established.”


OMG Edgar....what are you going to do about this?!
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Jan, 2018 04:40 pm
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Sat 27 Jan, 2018 11:44 am
@edgarblythe,
Surely this is not correct? The senate democrats are just going to give the president spending for the military and get absolutely nothing for the DACA and the rest of the immigration issues in return? Nothing for democrat side at all? Just a massive budget increase for the military while slashing everything else (which gives the excuse to cut in social security and other non-discretionary spending); and senate democrats are ok with that? What in the world was the shutdown about then? Just CHIP?
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 27 Jan, 2018 11:53 am
@revelette1,
What the Democrats get in exchange for having an effective military is protection from all the bad guys who want to kill Americans -- bad guys who won't care if those Democrats hate America and root for the bad guys, and will target those Democrats just as quickly as they'd target any other American.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 27 Jan, 2018 11:55 am
@revelette1,
I think it's called "being in the minority". The numbers add up in favor of the Republicans. The Democrats can obstruct — and then get criticized for "shutting down the government". If McConnell wanted to play nice he could add sweeteners to any bill up for consideration but he doesn't have to and he probably won't.
 

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 0.11 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 10:51:05