Progressives (Liberals)

Never be necessary.

So far, the media is covering Bernie, somewhat. In 2016 they tried to blank out any mention of him.

I think the best thing Bernie has going for him is that he has a lot more gravitas than any of the other far left declared candidates. However I believe he and his platform are still far too socialistic to work, even in the short term. In the early stages of the campaign, when all the exciting new promises are being laid out, some of this stuff looks better to the voting public than it does later on, when the practical facts, tradeoffs and economic effects associated with them become more apparent. While it is true that Bernie's voter support in 2016 surprised everyone - especially the complacent, entitled Hillary Clinton - , it is also equally true that it peaked as a strong and vocal minority of Democrat voters - enthusiastic, but still a minority , and not one with enough upside potential to win either the primary or the election. The Democrats may now face a problem somewhat like that of the Republicans have these past two years - an aggressive, fairly extreme minority in the Congressional delegation, strong and vocal enough to get attention and influence policy, but not strong enough to enact legislation. Their leadership will have to deal with this one, while at the same time supporting the selection of Presidential candidates who can win the election, and limiting the reach of those on the fringes who can't.

Trump remains a very polarizing figure who still talks too much, acts impulsively and overstates his case in a way that his ardent supporters love but many in the middle find offensive. That said , the emerging field of Democrat candidates, along with the current stars in their new Congressional delegation, certainly provide a lot of political fuel to sustain Trump and his supporters. The economy continues with relatively high growth and very low unemployment, and the ongoing wind down of the various Trump investigations appears very likely to be far more favorable to Trump than have been the last two years, and may possibly involve some serious political setbacks to those who have been associated with this extended process.

Interesting times !

Bernie's plans are The New Deal and The Great Society modernized for today. These are the programs that made the USA become the richest nation that ever existed and did the most good for the non billionaires among us. Your dream of keeping us foraging while those billionaires eat grapes and drink expensive wine is what is unsustainable.

Does that mean it will completely destroy the Black family quicker or just more efficiently?

It means the black family will still have racist assholes trying to hold them down and eliminate them. But at least they will be given a chance to live under the liberal plan. If you had reading comprehension you would have noticed I said under Bernie's plan it was updated to meet today's needs. Black rights is one of them.

I think it's an awful stretch. Mr. Sanders received primary votes which were less than 1% of all the votes actually cast in November. His ambitious plans to completely revamp the largest capitalist economy in the world and institute programs similar to those found the the European democracies will require large working majorities in Congress and friendly judges in the courts. While a socialist might manage to secure a majority it isn't going to be a huge majority. And all the GOP has to do is hold on to the 40% who form Trump's base and attract independents who aren't that keen on "socialism" while moderate Dems stay home. And even if a Dem wins the election, any far-reaching plans will result in lawsuits and defeat in the conservative judiciary.

This is the biggest hiccup with any of the progressive plans laid out to date. The two USSC justices Trump has seated will hurt the the progressive agenda for decades.

To the Trump devotees who pop in now and again, here is something I have been pondering the past week or so. How do you feel about Trump pushing real hard to get Saudi Arabia nuclear capabilities? How does that enhance his master plan to save everybody?

Defeatists.

Yes they will when Socialists take over. They promote policies that do not work. And roundly ignore the individual.

I may have buck teeth edgar, but I don't appreciate the jab via the song.

Regarding being a defeatist....how exactly?

You were in agreement with me a few days ago that the Supreme Court was indeed important to implementing the progressive agenda. A right leaning Supreme Court would be the ultimate judge on what policies were constitutional, and would be more likely to fine the policies you favor (and many that I favor) to be unconstitutional.

I'm sure you'd rather have a left leaning court than a right leaning one. What is defeatist about mentioning the facts?

I agree with the importance of the judiciary being there to serve the good of the people.

Considering the information in blatham's link, and the fact key Democrats could get this information long before we could, it underscores the need for bold action, not just invites to the Republicans to sit down to tea. My argument is, much of the Democratic party is also contaminated and we have to weed that out. We are facing a not so hidden revolution on the part of the right and we can't afford to be Mr Nice guy because it's all out war. There is a civil war under our noses. The first step is to understand they have been winning for nearly fifty years.

Susan
@g8torgrrl
·
2h
***Independents***
If you're in a *closed Primary state* (Delaware, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Wyoming) and you want Bernie - REGISTER as a Dem NOW. #Bernie2020

I will add, check to see your registration stays the way you put it every so often.

No, they have not, they have been losing.

I would absolutely support a Dem president adding two seats to the Supreme Court. McConnell set up new rules for the game so let's crush the bastard.

I don't disagree.

Yup

[sarcasm]Maybe you should add one senatorial seat per state while you're at it, and make the presidency into a panel, council, or jury with multiple members. In fact, why not just go ahead and have the general population as the house of representatives? It could just be called the "house of citizens" or "house of self-representing individuals" or maybe "we the people"[/sarcasm]