bernie sanders: regressive

[UncleBuck]

did she not serve you for being straight?

if that happened, you would side with the bigoted store owner, since you are a bigot who hates civil rights.

 

[twostrokenut]

if that happened, you would side with the bigoted store owner, since you are a bigot who hates civil rights.

it seems you claimed this jewelry lady would not serve you, on the basis of your sexuality....care to elaborate?

 

[UncleBuck]

you claimed this jewelry lady would not serve you, on the basis of your sexuality....

down a whole handle already? or is it the meth this time?

 

[twostrokenut]

down a whole handle already? or is it the meth this time?

no it's just google.

 

[UncleBuck]

no it's just google.

while on meth after swigging a handle.

 

[twostrokenut]

while on meth after swigging a handle.

she must have really hurt you. care to share?

 

[UncleBuck]

she must have really hurt you. care to share?

i have no idea what meth-addled delusions you are talking about.

 

[twostrokenut]

i have no idea what meth-addled delusions you are talking about.

prolly just some other guy with your name that golfs around your area and used to rent around where you were in Oregon. prolly just some other dude with your name that hates "rawn pawl" and "calls his own shots based on a large accumulation of data".

yeah I'm sure that's just a pure coincidence.

 

[UncleBuck]

prolly just some other guy with your name that golfs around your area and used to rent around where you were in Oregon. prolly just some other dude with your name that hates "rawn pawl" and "calls his own shots based on a large accumulation of data".

yeah I'm sure that's just a pure coincidence.

still have no idea what you are talking about, jew-hater.

 

[PCXV]

The problem with pushing one party left is that it will push the republicans further right. As long as there are still only 2 parties it's just going to continue cycle of infighting where one party has a majority and the other party just acts as opposition and nothing gets done.

There will be ideological backlash but progress is slowly won. Shouldn't the idea stand on its own merit, not whether it is considered liberal or conservative?

 

[PCXV]

Shouldn't the people in the Democratic party already support leftist policies? Why are they Democrats if they don't?

Because they are pragmatic. The Democratic Party is a coalition. There are many competing and conflicting constituencies within the party that must be persuaded before an idea is viable politically. A new party will place the opposing coalition, Republicans, in an advantageous position.

"I see willingness to understand these issues" - what does that mean? If they're willing to understand these issues, why are they unwilling to act on them in congress when it comes down to a vote? Why don't they propose these issues they're seemingly so concerned about when they hold total control of the government, like Republicans do?

Pretty much the same reason as above, including political backlash from both the other side and opposition within the party. But I do wonder if they would have just passed Single-Payer overnight if Americans would realize how much better it was. If they botched the execution of it, though... Which is probably another reason to build consensus first. Opposition will try to sabotage execution - just like Republicans sabotaged the ACA and now can point the finger and claim it failed on its own.

I'm not fully on board with the idea of forming a new political party yet, simply because of the inherent problems in the system it involves, but I think if that happened, the best option for success would be to simply counter the current Democratic party and propose something similar to the UK Labour party's manifesto. Show a blatant and strong shift to the left, let people decide, and watch the numbers of registered Democrats fall accordingly because they don't actually represent progressive policies.

How many years would Republicans have a majority though?

No denying the Democratic Party Platform is progressive. That's not the argument. The argument is that Democratic politicians, who are beholden to their donors, do not actually support or enact progressive healthcare policy when they hold power. They simply say they support it when they have no chance of actually enacting it - when Republicans hold power. It is, as @ttystikk said, simply lip service. What actual evidence supports the idea that any corporate Democrat who has accepted money from the pharmaceutical industry actually supports enacting a system of universal healthcare? Does their voting record in congress show that?

Define what you believe is government corruption, a list a few examples

I agree with that argument mostly, but my understanding of why they do that has me conflicted; is it political strategy and pragmatism mixed with a lack of pressure from the public, or is it a more corrupt say one thing and do another because the nobody will stop them sort of thing.

I wish I kept up with every bill and every vote, but I haven't. But from limited knowledge, the bills proposed are controversial for many reasons and these Democrats may have fair concerns. I will have to look into it more to have a real strong opinion.

To me, government corruption is placing personal gain over the public interest. I think there are guilty Democrats, but until we get enough industries, voters, and subsequently politicians to help out those Democrats and push moral policy, we will likely face defeat and commit political suicide, and possibly create a stigma against out policies (due to oppositional sabotage and stigmatization).

 

[PCXV]

Winning over big money is never going to happen. Most of the 1% is oblivious to the struggles of the rest of us, many more are apathetic at best, and some are sick bastards who enjoy watching is suffer.
We haven't made any real progress in since FDR; and his progressive policies have been eroding basically since he left office.

Mark my words; independent progressives have had enough of the lip service from the Corporatist Democratic party. Another feeble attempt in 2020 will fail, it doesn't matter who the democrats run. The "I'm not Trump, Pence, Ryan" approach doesn't work anymore. The democrats have abandoned their base, which is why they keep losing. Many of us would rather vote a third party, or sit out an election than be force fed another shit sandwich. This is exactly what got Trump elected. How many independents either didn't vote, or votes 3rd party? For Christ sake, A dead gorilla got thousands of votes.

Democrats need to wake up: embrace your base, and start voting that way, or the power structure will continue to shift to the right.

The Republican party has to be dismantled before the Democratic party is. Or else we will suffer under your latter description of elites as opposed to the former and the ones that actually know how big of a problem we are facing.

 

[Xcoregamerskillz]

There will be ideological backlash but progress is slowly won. Shouldn't the idea stand on its own merit, not whether it is considered liberal or conservative?

What idea, exactly?

 

[Xcoregamerskillz]

The Republican party has to be dismantled before the Democratic party is. Or else we will suffer under your latter description of elites as opposed to the former and the ones that actually know how big of a problem we are facing.

What? No.

 

[PCXV]

What idea, exactly?

Progressive ideology, any sort of proposal by anyone ever.

 

[PCXV]

What? No.

It will take a majority to effectively enact change no matter what. Dividing the middle and the left into minority parties in a winner-takes-all political system assures the greater evil, Republicans, win every time.

Republicans haven't served the public in decades. To even think about enacting moderate and leftist policy, first we have to defeat the party that corrupts our government. People need to be able to trust government again, Republicans number one goal is to prevent that. They want government to fail. It's what they campaign on.

 

[ttystikk]

It will take a majority to effectively enact change no matter what. Dividing the middle and the left into minority parties in a winner-takes-all political system assures the greater evil, Republicans, win every time.

Republicans haven't served the public in decades. To even think about enacting moderate and leftist policy, first we have to defeat the party that corrupts our government. People need to be able to trust government again, Republicans number one goal is to prevent that. They want government to fail. It's what they campaign on.

The Democratic Party takes money from the very same donors, so expecting them to do anything different is unrealistic.

For instance, even in the Democratic supermajority state of California, the Democrats have killed single payer health care.

They'd rather see people die than live up to their promises.

 

[UncleBuck]

The Democratic Party takes money from the very same donors, so expecting them to do anything different is unrealistic.

For instance, even in the Democratic supermajority state of California, the Democrats have killed single payer health care.

They'd rather see people die than live up to their promises.

how many strict party line votes do we have to shove in your deluded cult face before you stop spamming this retarded crap?

 

[ttystikk]

how many strict party line votes do we have to shove in your deluded cult face before you stop spamming this retarded crap?

I'm still waiting for the Democrats to actually live up to any promise.

They are happy to keep taking the money and they don't care that their constituents are drowning.

 

[UncleBuck]

I'm still waiting for the Democrats to actually live up to any promise.

They are happy to keep taking the money and they don't care that their constituents are drowning.

useful idiot.