Aug 1, 2017 it's a broad question. But mostly, I see the Democratic party as being defined by its relationship with government - the belief that government can and should be a force of good for its people. I don't think someone having moral objections to abortion inherently makes them unacceptable to the Democratic party. I think if it's someone who, say, wants to aggressively scale back financial support of Planned Parenthood, we're creeping into a different kind of territory. And on that same note, your point about access to other health care being curbed once abortion access is curbed is well taken. I'm just saying, I don't think it's healthy for the Democratic party to draw these lines in the sand at a time when they need to broaden their appeal rather than further restrict it. It's one thing for an individual Dem voter to reject a pro-life Dem candidate (that's totally fair, and a matter of personal preference - see, I'm very pro-choice) - but quite another for that same candidate to be shunned by the party apparatus because they don't check a certain box.
Aug 1, 2017 I mean, for your line of reasoning to work you'd have to believe the working class has ever been culturally similar to the elite. The dems got backed by labor unions because labor unions were strongly organized bases that they could get on board by implementing policies that benefited them. That mutual relationship is gone. Labor unions are gone. Now the working class isn't part of any unifying organization that can be recruited with policy reform. Want to change that? Support labor at a time when wealth inequality in this country is staggering. You don't? Compromise your position on social issues like you're suggesting. I know which I'd rather do.
Aug 1, 2017 well, i believe ~10% of the population still belongs to one right. But a far cry from the mid-2th century admittedly. This is an established political tact though - Nixon did it to an extent, then Reagan. Exploiting working class' essential cultural conservatism, and anxiety over race among other issues, is a thing that happened lol. It's not either or.
Aug 1, 2017 I agree it's not either, or, but I'm very specifically arguing against pandering to their culture by lapsing on our principles than by rediscovering lost ones in supporting laborers with policy instead of undermining them at every turn. Most of those people are employed in the public sector. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf The private sector is where you see the inequality growing. You can move capital to third world countries and make factory workers compete with an exploited population across the world. You can't move a labor force, which is the reason why the few strikes that happen anymore rarely, rarely succeed. These companies already have other spaces where they can send the work. A global economy benefits the people with capital to take advantage of it. It doesn't benefit the people who work with them. Not to the same extent as is evidenced by any of those stats you look up about real wages for the middle class.
Aug 1, 2017 I disagree with a few things here. It's not inherently pandering - at least from a local POV. A congressional Democratic candidate could earnestly share heretical views. And it's not "lapsing principles" - the party platform isn't changing. And while I agree it'd be great to support policy more beneficial to pig farmers and such, this is a different bucket. We will see how much economic Bernie-ism seeps into the party's rhetoric moving forward. and d---, you sound isolationist af. MAGA eh marc_tesla
Aug 1, 2017 You sound like a filthy centrist, which is why I want a left party that actually pushes leftist principles. You're arguing we not only allow, but support, candidates so they can get anti-abortion policy through. Which they would, btw, because conservatives, for all of their flaws, don't give ground on issues ever. Unlike you, my principles don't bend because I want to win some more districts. Instead, I look to other routes like fighting back against the right's prolific use of redistricting or actually supporting popular policies like single payer healthcare or reinforcing the security of the labor market that's hurt the middle class for decades. I think that's definitely more attractive than stripping a woman's right to choose. These aren't different buckets so much as different routes you can take to reach the same goal. I accurately described the ills of late stage capitalism. The results speak for themselves m8.
Aug 1, 2017 Also, lol at claiming spineless democrats don't exist shortly before proving that you are one.
Aug 1, 2017 None of this gets done if we get all wrapped up in purist ideological fights. We might as well just be an off branch of the Green Party at that point. Our government isn't set up for rapid and vast amounts of change in short time. The founders created three branches of government so change would come slow. If part of getting to a single-payer system, criminal justice reform, gun control laws etc. means we have to cater to some pro-life Dems, so be it. I'm all for taking baby steps than attempting one huge leap and getting no where. We can't keep trying to push costal politics down rural Americans throats.
Aug 1, 2017 nope, just political savvy. so join Jill Stein? Don't know where you live, but party will survive without you lol Nope. I've described my calculation pretty thoroughly. reread Hold on, hold on. We all know you're a humongous p---- lol. So stop. "Principles"? You sounds like a Republican. You can have principles -- I'll take a Democratic House that's actually working to improve the lives of american families. Agreed -- this is also an issue. There's plenty of ways to combat the GOP. **note: you mostly post on here, so I question how politically active you are irl lol. Highly, highly doubt this would happen. Did you follow the recent debate over the repeal of the ACA in a Republican Senate? Again, reread my posts. o ok. good sentence aw marc/charlie is in his lenin phase. qt pfft, because I'm not spouting off #revolutionary gibberish? grow up. I mean, this is about message coordination (this is for you too @WPG). Remember the Missouri moderate democratic gubernatorial candidate endorsed by the NRA? Was winning the whole time. What happened after Jason kandor and HRC flooded the state with their (comparatively much more) liberal ads? All three lost. Do you realize how many Republican congressmen exist in states with a state-wide Democratic officeholder? (Note: I should know later this week at work lmao.) but the answer is: a lot. Voting blocs that could conceivably go Democratic with the right tweak. There's a reason why you're seeing folks like Howard Dean get upset about this lol It's important to recognize that while abortion is often seen as an economic issue-- many see it as a moral one. Or if it IS viewed as an economic issue, it's not a predominant one. That's what makes it such a dicey social issue. There's layers of sophistication to this, as you know, that go beyond accusing -yawn- the party of selling out. @Enigma stay winnin. marc/charlie needs to Like all my posts or gtfo
Aug 1, 2017 Pre-election me would agree with both of you. I was happy to support the dems and let them run whoever because they were the better of two s-----y choices. Guess what? They still ate s--- against Donald Trump. I'm not doubling down on that. They lost any faith I had in them, and my loyalty with it. My cynicism won't weigh me down any longer. So if you both think asking candidates not to strip women of their rights is too "ideologically pure", and that popular policy in line with the left's ideology is "too broad", then we're not in the same party. I'm left of you, and I stand by my beliefs. I'll happily vote for Jill Stein or Bernie or whoever runs on a platform that is the most geared towards the good of the people. Supporting the biggest party's regressive ideals and wavering commitment got us nowhere. Also, Trump proved you can throw whoever you want into that office. If he can't bring about the apocalypse, then I'm done voting for the most prepped and "deserving" dumbass that I think will win. I'd rather be for a hopeless cause than part of a s-----y one.
Aug 1, 2017 @Charlie Work youre disappointed with a presidential election, which featured many traditional congressional candidates. I'm not talking about changing senate or presidential stance on abortion-- did you read my post about message coordination lol. Internalize my truth lol Clearly things need to change. We dems need to collectively be smarter... hopefully that includes you
Aug 1, 2017 I'd rather find a new message that wins average Americans over, one in line with the left's ideals, than cynically support abortion in strategic locations. Sorry if that's not "smart" of me.
Aug 1, 2017 yes - see the recently debuted "better deal" It all goes together, so no - it's not cynical. Though didn't you just characterize yourself that way? Sad.
Aug 1, 2017 Yeah, the same deal Bill Clinton was pushing in the 90s. Everybody just needs a college degree and to learn how to code. Then nobody will have to work at Wallmart or McDonalds or any number of other service industry jobs that make up the majority of employment in this country. I don't see a flaw in that line of thinking. Revolutionary idea that the democrats haven't been pushing and failing to show results from for decades. EDIT: Just to add to this, high paying jobs are no longer high paying when there's a huge workforce available. Not in this economy. Good article on it: http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/Articles/Low-wages-and-job-insecurity-as-a-destructive-global-standard People finding better jobs only makes those jobs worse in our system.
Aug 1, 2017 not going to reply to @Papa Andy until he apologizes for implying anyone left of hrc is jill stein tbh!!!!!!!
Aug 2, 2017 The only legislation that reduces the termination of fetuses is pro-birth control and pro-birth control education legislation. https://www.google.com/amp/amp.slat...hen_legal_abortion_restrictions_increase.html
Aug 2, 2017 I don't see a problem with Democrats doing this. Like @Papa Andy said, if supporting a pro-life candidate is an adjustment that the Democratic party may have to make in order to win an election in an area that is traditionally pro-life (but would otherwise tend to vote Democrat), then that is just good strategy on their part. On the other hand though, I do see why this would make more leftist/die hard Democrats unhappy.
Aug 2, 2017 it is - how are you? --- this post brought to you by http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/flashback-detroit-erupts-into-race-riots-in-1967-w494702 ---
Aug 2, 2017 Ok I drank a bottle of that fancy mineral water with the bubbles and s--- in it but it tasted like s--- so i feel kinda sick after drinking the whole thing also i think i took too much ritalin which is also making my tummy feel funny and yourself?
