• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The New York Times is back to bashing Bernie and Progressives

Verax

Verax

Disappointed in Trump
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
12,240
Reaction score
4,519
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Democrats in Split-Screen: The Base Wants It All. The Party Wants to Win.

Bernie Sanders rallied his youthful, often-raucous coalition Saturday night at a gathering called the “People’s Summit,” where supporters hailed him in worshipful language.
Click to expand...

The growing tension between the party’s ascendant militant wing and Democrats in conservative-leaning terrain, where the party must compete to win power in Congress, was on vivid, split-screen display over the weekend: in Chicago, where Senator Bernie Sanders led a revival-style meeting of his progressive devotees, and in Atlanta, where Democrats are spending colossal sums of money in hopes of seizing a traditionally Republican congressional district.


It may be essential for Democrats to reconcile the party’s two clashing impulses if they are to retake the House of Representatives in 2018. In a promising political environment, a drawn-out struggle over Democratic strategy and ideology could spill into primary elections and disrupt the party’s path to a majority.
Click to expand...

They're already doing the same thing that fractured the party last time. I honestly believe it is on purpose and once again they would rather Donald or Kim Jong Un or anyone but a progressive lead the country because the Democratic leadership is just as corrupt and beholden to the wealthy as the right is. If they truly wanted us all under one big happy tent they would welcome Bernie and progressives with open arms and stop taunting us and trying to start a fight. They know what they are doing and I really don't have high hopes for 2018 or 2020. Make no mistake, no matter what happens the wealthy will be calling the shots in the end and we'll all stand around trying to figure out what happened and what we can do next time. With any luck we'll get a round of strong progressives in the house and senate in 2018 and begin laying the ground work for taking over or at least having real influence in the Democratic party, but I wouldn't bet on it happening any time soon or without a fight to the death.

Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer Hillary to Donald (after finding out he's worse than anyone could have imagined), or probably Biden or whatever mainstream candidate they run to most Republicans. But the mainstream left is never going to go beyond lukewarm policies that coddle the rich while talking a tough game. But I guess that is better than Donald and the right vowing to burn this whole mother****er to the ground to get more tax breaks.
 
Verax said:
Democrats in Split-Screen: The Base Wants It All. The Party Wants to Win.





They're already doing the same thing that fractured the party last time. I honestly believe it is on purpose and once again they would rather Donald or Kim Jong Un or anyone but a progressive lead the country because the Democratic leadership is just as corrupt and beholden to the wealthy as the right is. If they truly wanted us all under one big happy tent they would welcome Bernie and progressives with open arms and stop taunting us and trying to start a fight. They know what they are doing and I really don't have high hopes for 2018 or 2020. Make no mistake, no matter what happens the wealthy will be calling the shots in the end and we'll all stand around trying to figure out what happened and what we can do next time. With any luck we'll get a round of strong progressives in the house and senate in 2018 and begin laying the ground work for taking over or at least having real influence in the Democratic party, but I wouldn't bet on it happening any time soon or without a fight to the death.

Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer Hillary to Donald (after finding out he's worse than anyone could have imagined), or probably Biden or whatever mainstream candidate they run to most Republicans. But the mainstream left is never going to go beyond lukewarm policies that coddle the rich while talking a tough game. But I guess that is better than Donald and the right vowing to burn this whole mother****er to the ground to get more tax breaks.
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree with you that the best way to stop the hemorrhaging of seats for the dnc is for them to move farther to the left. That plan has been working out so well for them. They should double down on it.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
I absolutely agree with you that the best way to stop the hemorrhaging of seats for the dnc is for them to move farther to the left. That plan has been working out so well for them. They should double down on it.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Given the taste of the Right voters have been sampling, Democrats are crazy not to go Left.
 
JackA said:
Given the taste of the Right voters have been sampling, Democrats are crazy not to go Left.
Click to expand...
Agreed, i think the left should mash the gas pedal to the floor and go full speed ahead. Im sure the majority of the states will totally embrace the uber left ideology.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
Verax said:
Democrats in Split-Screen: The Base Wants It All. The Party Wants to Win.





They're already doing the same thing that fractured the party last time. I honestly believe it is on purpose and once again they would rather Donald or Kim Jong Un or anyone but a progressive lead the country because the Democratic leadership is just as corrupt and beholden to the wealthy as the right is. If they truly wanted us all under one big happy tent they would welcome Bernie and progressives with open arms and stop taunting us and trying to start a fight. They know what they are doing and I really don't have high hopes for 2018 or 2020. Make no mistake, no matter what happens the wealthy will be calling the shots in the end and we'll all stand around trying to figure out what happened and what we can do next time. With any luck we'll get a round of strong progressives in the house and senate in 2018 and begin laying the ground work for taking over or at least having real influence in the Democratic party, but I wouldn't bet on it happening any time soon or without a fight to the death.

Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer Hillary to Donald (after finding out he's worse than anyone could have imagined), or probably Biden or whatever mainstream candidate they run to most Republicans. But the mainstream left is never going to go beyond lukewarm policies that coddle the rich while talking a tough game. But I guess that is better than Donald and the right vowing to burn this whole mother****er to the ground to get more tax breaks.
Click to expand...

I remember a time when the Democratic was the big tent party. When both parties had their liberal and conservative wings. Where in the house the Democrats would run candidates that could win regardless of strategy, same for the senate in the different states. This strategy lead to 50 consecutive unbroken years of control of the house. They also had control of the senate for 44 years out of that 50. 1955-1994. As old as I am, I never dreamed that the Republicans would ever gain control of the house. A Democratic House was a natural, it was what was and supposedly would always be.

You get into in fighting like the Tea Party has done with the Republicans, you lose seats you should have won. The so called extreme ideology wins a primary fight to defeat a more moderate and then gets trounced in the general election. What it seems that the Tea Party and in this case progressives need to learn is that nominating and electing more moderates in districts where the far right or far left progressive ideology can't win is a plus to that ideology and to the party. It is in my opinion going with a more moderate that will vote your progressive ideology 80% or so of the time than knock off that moderate in a primary and elect someone from the far right who will vote your progressive ideology 0% of the time.

How strange that the far left and far right can't recognize this fact. The old Democratic Party recognized this and let whomever had the best chance of winning in the general election run under the party's flag. Whichever party controls the house and or the senate has a huge advantage. Being ideological pure destroys that chance of control. Perhaps the question is, do you want to be an ideological pure progressive party which probably would always be in the minority or a more moderate party which would embrace most Americans and become the majority party even is it means members at times wouldn't 100% vote and toe the party line.

Remember, those representatives are suppose to represent the people in their district first. Not the party they belong to, that comes later. That is the problem we have in Washington today, too many members of each party representing their political party and not the people who elected. They have become Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, progressives first and Americans somewhere way further down the line. This is why Washington is so polarized. Non-functional.

Most Americans aren't far right or far left. They are in the middle, perhaps it time for both parties to recognize this.
 
JackA said:
Given the taste of the Right voters have been sampling, Democrats are crazy not to go Left.
Click to expand...

I think both the right and left is missing the point. For years the Democrats have been moving further left and the Republicans further right. The Democrats shed their conservative wing becoming an all liberal left party leaving them instead of a national party, the party of the Northeast and West Coast. The Republican have done the same with their liberal wing, the old Rockefeller Republicans. They are now the party of the south and the plain states, no longer national either.

The problem is most Americans aren't way to the left or way to the right as the two major parties have become. They are somewhere in the middle. The two major parties continuing to move further left and right have left more and more Americans without a political home or a political party to associate with. As late as 2000, independents, the non-affiliated made up approximately 30% of the total electorate. Today the non-affiliated has risen to somewhere between 40-44% depending on whether one uses Gallup's or Pew Research numbers. More and more Americans are leaving the two major parties as they move further and further to the extreme right and left.

Over the last 15-20 years the Democratic Party has shrunk from 38% of the electorate down to 30%. The Republican Party from 33% down to 27%. The fact is the two major parties by moving further and further left and right are abandoning those Americans who do not hold extreme views one way or the other. The fact that we are locked into a two party system is the only thing that keeps the two major parties at the top of the heap. They represent less and less of America, yet retain and enhance their political power over those they fail to represent. There is no place for middle America, the average Joe to turn to when it comes to politics anymore. The major parties have deserted him and most Americans.
 
trouble13 said:
I absolutely agree with you that the best way to stop the hemorrhaging of seats for the dnc is for them to move farther to the left. That plan has been working out so well for them. They should double down on it.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

They lost seats because of how they pushed Obamacare through and also by playing on racism and painting Obama as the great black boogeyman.
 
Perotista said:
I remember a time when the Democratic was the big tent party. When both parties had their liberal and conservative wings. Where in the house the Democrats would run candidates that could win regardless of strategy, same for the senate in the different states. This strategy lead to 50 consecutive unbroken years of control of the house. They also had control of the senate for 44 years out of that 50. 1955-1994. As old as I am, I never dreamed that the Republicans would ever gain control of the house. A Democratic House was a natural, it was what was and supposedly would always be.

You get into in fighting like the Tea Party has done with the Republicans, you lose seats you should have won. The so called extreme ideology wins a primary fight to defeat a more moderate and then gets trounced in the general election. What it seems that the Tea Party and in this case progressives need to learn is that nominating and electing more moderates in districts where the far right or far left progressive ideology can't win is a plus to that ideology and to the party. It is in my opinion going with a more moderate that will vote your progressive ideology 80% or so of the time than knock off that moderate in a primary and elect someone from the far right who will vote your progressive ideology 0% of the time.

How strange that the far left and far right can't recognize this fact. The old Democratic Party recognized this and let whomever had the best chance of winning in the general election run under the party's flag. Whichever party controls the house and or the senate has a huge advantage. Being ideological pure destroys that chance of control. Perhaps the question is, do you want to be an ideological pure progressive party which probably would always be in the minority or a more moderate party which would embrace most Americans and become the majority party even is it means members at times wouldn't 100% vote and toe the party line.

Remember, those representatives are suppose to represent the people in their district first. Not the party they belong to, that comes later. That is the problem we have in Washington today, too many members of each party representing their political party and not the people who elected. They have become Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, progressives first and Americans somewhere way further down the line. This is why Washington is so polarized. Non-functional.

Most Americans aren't far right or far left. They are in the middle, perhaps it time for both parties to recognize this.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with you however to me it isn't so much about ideology as it is about sharing power and respect. The Democratic leadership and their media counterparts have been openly hostile to Bernie and his supporters. I have no problem with moderate policies and trying to work with the right for policies both sides can live with. It doesn't work very well for each extreme to take over and punish the other side in these wild ideological knife fights where one side pushes through Obamacare without discussion and then 6 years later the other side wants to burn it down. Really though I would just like the Democrats to treat their entire base with respect and welcome them into the discussion as an equal voice instead of making us the enemy and creating a rift. We should also be able to voice our opinions without being attacked and ridiculed.
 
Greenbeard said:
And before?
Click to expand...

I was glad to see Hillary lose but it made me sick to see Donald win. Had everyone known Donald was not acting but was actually a lunatic and that Hillary could easily lose I think more people would have gotten out and voted for her.
 
Verax said:
I mostly agree with you however to me it isn't so much about ideology as it is about sharing power and respect. The Democratic leadership and their media counterparts have been openly hostile to Bernie and his supporters. I have no problem with moderate policies and trying to work with the right for policies both sides can live with. It doesn't work very well for each extreme to take over and punish the other side in these wild ideological knife fights where one side pushes through Obamacare without discussion and then 6 years later the other side wants to burn it down. Really though I would just like the Democrats to treat their entire base with respect and welcome them into the discussion as an equal voice instead of making us the enemy and creating a rift. We should also be able to voice our opinions without being attacked and ridiculed.
Click to expand...

That I understand. Political ideology wise, Me and Sanders are for the most part very far a part. But I respect him and if it had been Sanders running against Trump, I would have voted for him. With Clinton vs. Trump, I voted third party as I couldn't stand either.

There was a time when there was room for all political ideologies within the Democratic Party. Each and everyone was treated with respect. Perhaps it is a leadership thing within the Democratic Party itself. It used to be that the Democratic Party welcomed everyone, ideology didn't matter. They would unite around election time to win elections and then fight like Hades during the congressional sessions among themselves as each Democratic brought to the table something different from the others. Then unite again for the next election. There were no such things as party line votes.

Will Rogers once said, "I belong to no organized political Party, I'm a Democrat."
 
Verax said:
They lost seats because of how they pushed Obamacare through and also by playing on racism and painting Obama as the great black boogeyman.
Click to expand...
Your point?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
Verax said:
I mostly agree with you however to me it isn't so much about ideology as it is about sharing power and respect. The Democratic leadership and their media counterparts have been openly hostile to Bernie and his supporters. I have no problem with moderate policies and trying to work with the right for policies both sides can live with. It doesn't work very well for each extreme to take over and punish the other side in these wild ideological knife fights where one side pushes through Obamacare without discussion and then 6 years later the other side wants to burn it down. Really though I would just like the Democrats to treat their entire base with respect and welcome them into the discussion as an equal voice instead of making us the enemy and creating a rift. We should also be able to voice our opinions without being attacked and ridiculed.
Click to expand...
I agree with your sentiment but would add that bernie supporters are also guilty of the behavior your railing against. They did not exactly show tolerance when they showed up at Trumps rallies.

I do however share your desire for everyone to tone things down. I have no problem with people voicing their ideological views but the name calling and violence needs to be stopped.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom