The Democratic Party Continues to Ignore Reality

[Jhhnn]

Political facts nor conjecture put food on the table. The people work harder and see less liberty. When Pennsylvania shuns big blue, a change needs to come.

Less liberty.... like how, exactly?

Work harder? Darn tootin'! The job creators have been enjoying a labor glut for some while so it's easy to beat the cash out of the employees. When they can swing it, they'll automate their beer drinkin' pill poppin' callin' in sick junkie asses right out of their jobs. For which they deserve tax cuts, obviously, along with less regulation of their business practices.

So, uhh, vote Republican & it'll all trickle down... in your dreams, that is. It fits right in with the illusion that Trump isn't the same self serving elitist asshole he's always been but something entirely different, a real champion of working people. How anybody ever believed that is a tribute to the relentless mind fuck right wing agitprop of the last 20+ years.

 

[theeedude]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...711e53-eb49-4f9a-8dea-3cd836fcf287_story.html

Meanwhile Trump's in laws selling US visas to Chinese at half mil a pop.

 

[ivwshane]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...711e53-eb49-4f9a-8dea-3cd836fcf287_story.html

Meanwhile Trump's in laws selling US visas to Chinese at half mil a pop.

The issue isn't selling visas for investments, that's been standard for those type of visas to encourage investment in the US. The issue in this particular case is that we don't know if these investments are directly benefiting the trumps in any direct way.

 

[Jhhnn]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...711e53-eb49-4f9a-8dea-3cd836fcf287_story.html

Meanwhile Trump's in laws selling US visas to Chinese at half mil a pop.

But they had the chutzpah to excoriate Hillary over the Clinton Foundation...

 

[Moonbeam]

Yeah well I ain't Jesus Christ and I'm not exactly a fan of God either.

Then you are nothing more or less that what you hate, no less the blind lost programmed conservative voting for his own self destruction because what you hate in his is your own self image. Jesus Christ is just one worldly manifestation in a single individual of the true self within us. It is your nature and destiny and potential that you do not believe in because you were taught to feel worthless. Kindness to the monster, the ego that projects, isn't work you do for others, its what you do to open the door to self forgiveness. You are Jesus Christ and the image of God and every dog that wags its tail in you presence can see it. Don't disappoint them. Shine your light as best you can. The suffering of the world is crushing and it needs your help.

 

[Moonbeam]

The sad thing is that there are people that really believe that Trump puts America first.

Perhaps you can tell him what your explanation for economic insecurity and stagnant wages since the late seventies is due to. I think he believes the average American has been sold out for the benefit of corporations and the rich and Trump is going to fix it.

 

[jmagg]

Less liberty.... like how, exactly?

Work harder? Darn tootin'! The job creators have been enjoying a labor glut for some while so it's easy to beat the cash out of the employees. When they can swing it, they'll automate their beer drinkin' pill poppin' callin' in sick junkie asses right out of their jobs. For which they deserve tax cuts, obviously, along with less regulation of their business practices.

So, uhh, vote Republican & it'll all trickle down... in your dreams, that is. It fits right in with the illusion that Trump isn't the same self serving elitist asshole he's always been but something entirely different, a real champion of working people. How anybody ever believed that is a tribute to the relentless mind *** right wing agitprop of the last 20+ years.

Your rant is misguided. My reference for change was directed at the Democrats regarding inclusion of the working class and the lack thereof.

 

[Jhhnn]

Your rant is misguided. My reference for change was directed at the Democrats regarding inclusion of the working class and the lack thereof.

Which explains the "less liberty" swipe not at all, nor does it explain Democratic policy concerning healthcare, minimum wage, collective bargaining or the rest of the 2016 Democratic platform that is *obviously* inclusive of the working class.

 

[Jaskalas]

The FACT is that most of that employment isn't worth !@#$. It is simply not good enough. Those people are desperate for something, someone to rescue them even if you don't see it.

And, uhh, you have data to back that up? And not good enough compared to... what? To the economic devastation Repubs left in the wake of the Ownership Society?

Considering where we were 8 years ago & total Repub obstruction in the meanwhile we're actually doing decently well.

Encountering a distortion of this magnitude is somewhat remarkable. But it is precisely why the nation has fled Democrats. The economy ebbs and flows but I do not speak of the subject you raise. To condense my argument to a point, I speak of income inequality, the 40+ year trend of decline in the value of labor, and how today's America grants us the working poor. You cite employment numbers as if that's the end of the story, everyone should be happy. Why did you do that? That's a Republican move you made.

When I raised the subject of the economy your ego took charge, psyched you up for combat against Republican usurpers against an economic recovery that you internalized. This has blinded you. Either you do not recognize it when someone cries out against the pain of trickle down economics... and you reply with oranges to my apples when we'd actually be in agreement.... or worse... you'd defend income inequality. I just don't see you doing that and still voting Democrat.

But it is this Pavlovian response to tell people they're "actually doing decently well" that crushes Democrats in recent elections. It's elitist, it's tone deaf... it's just plain wrong. People, in general, are not doing well. The value of their labor has been in decline for over 40 years. Trump won by scapegoating trade deals and immigrants on this very subject. Sanders was given energy by speaking of it and vowing to solve the problem. Obama swept a nation on the hope that he'd change this.

Before I continue with the "data to back that up", I want you to confirm whether that is still necessary.
Do you deny the problem of income inequality, do you oppose the basic economic tenants of the Democratic Party?
Do you actually think people are doing well on the trickle down status quo?
I would certainly hope not.

 

[dank69]

Encountering a distortion of this magnitude is somewhat remarkable. But it is precisely why the nation has fled Democrats. The economy ebbs and flows but I do not speak of the subject you raise. To condense my argument to a point, I speak of income inequality, the 40+ year trend of decline in the value of labor, and how today's America grants us the working poor. You cite employment numbers as if that's the end of the story, everyone should be happy. Why did you do that? That's a Republican move you made.

When I raised the subject of the economy your ego took charge, psyched you up for combat against Republican usurpers against an economic recovery that you internalized. This has blinded you. Either you do not recognize it when someone cries out against the pain of trickle down economics... and you reply with oranges to my apples when we'd actually be in agreement.... or worse... you'd defend income inequality. I just don't see you doing that and still voting Democrat.

But it is this Pavlovian response to tell people they're "actually doing decently well" that crushes Democrats in recent elections. It's elitist, it's tone deaf... it's just plain wrong. People, in general, are not doing well. The value of their labor has been in decline for over 40 years. Trump won by scapegoating trade deals and immigrants on this very subject. Sanders was given energy by speaking of it and vowing to solve the problem. Obama swept a nation on the hope that he'd change this.

Before I continue with the "data to back that up", I want you to confirm whether that is still necessary.
Do you deny the problem of income inequality, do you oppose the basic economic tenants of the Democratic Party?
Do you actually think people are doing well on the trickle down status quo?
I would certainly hope not.

Income inequality indicators had just started to show signs of reversing thanks to Democrats raising taxes on the rich despite enormous opposition from the Republicans. The Democrats wanted to make even more drastic changes but were blocked by Republicans from doing so. Very smart of Americans to flee the Democrats into the open arms of Republicans.

 

[Jhhnn]

Encountering a distortion of this magnitude is somewhat remarkable. But it is precisely why the nation has fled Democrats. The economy ebbs and flows but I do not speak of the subject you raise. To condense my argument to a point, I speak of income inequality, the 40+ year trend of decline in the value of labor, and how today's America grants us the working poor. You cite employment numbers as if that's the end of the story, everyone should be happy. Why did you do that? That's a Republican move you made.

When I raised the subject of the economy your ego took charge, psyched you up for combat against Republican usurpers against an economic recovery that you internalized. This has blinded you. Either you do not recognize it when someone cries out against the pain of trickle down economics... and you reply with oranges to my apples when we'd actually be in agreement.... or worse... you'd defend income inequality. I just don't see you doing that and still voting Democrat.

But it is this Pavlovian response to tell people they're "actually doing decently well" that crushes Democrats in recent elections. It's elitist, it's tone deaf... it's just plain wrong. People, in general, are not doing well. The value of their labor has been in decline for over 40 years. Trump won by scapegoating trade deals and immigrants on this very subject. Sanders was given energy by speaking of it and vowing to solve the problem. Obama swept a nation on the hope that he'd change this.

Before I continue with the "data to back that up", I want you to confirm whether that is still necessary.
Do you deny the problem of income inequality, do you oppose the basic economic tenants of the Democratic Party?
Do you actually think people are doing well on the trickle down status quo?
I would certainly hope not.

This is your first mention of income inequality per se. I merely point out that we've done fairly well in the aftermath of the Ownership society looting spree despite the efforts of the Party of No. Your claim that all the jobs created in the wake of that are shit jobs obviously isn't true.

Income inequality indicators had just started to show signs of reversing thanks to Democrats raising taxes on the rich despite enormous opposition from the Republicans. The Democrats wanted to make even more drastic changes but were blocked by Republicans from doing so. Very smart of Americans to flee the Democrats into the open arms of Republicans.

Taxes & redistribution are the only way we'll regain the benefits of middle class income share that's been greatly diminished over the last 35 years. We need more subsidies to families that reach further up into the middle class. Right wing mega billionaires bought the Repub party to prevent that & pay for massive propaganda campaigns to prevent that realization among the electorate.

Technological progress has simply outstripped our moralistic ways of assigning & distributing the benefits of it. Everybody had to work in Jamestown for the colony to survive & the leadership had work for everybody. Neither of those things are true today.

 

[ivwshane]

Encountering a distortion of this magnitude is somewhat remarkable. But it is precisely why the nation has fled Democrats. The economy ebbs and flows but I do not speak of the subject you raise. To condense my argument to a point, I speak of income inequality, the 40+ year trend of decline in the value of labor, and how today's America grants us the working poor. You cite employment numbers as if that's the end of the story, everyone should be happy. Why did you do that? That's a Republican move you made.

When I raised the subject of the economy your ego took charge, psyched you up for combat against Republican usurpers against an economic recovery that you internalized. This has blinded you. Either you do not recognize it when someone cries out against the pain of trickle down economics... and you reply with oranges to my apples when we'd actually be in agreement.... or worse... you'd defend income inequality. I just don't see you doing that and still voting Democrat.

But it is this Pavlovian response to tell people they're "actually doing decently well" that crushes Democrats in recent elections. It's elitist, it's tone deaf... it's just plain wrong. People, in general, are not doing well. The value of their labor has been in decline for over 40 years. Trump won by scapegoating trade deals and immigrants on this very subject. Sanders was given energy by speaking of it and vowing to solve the problem. Obama swept a nation on the hope that he'd change this.

Before I continue with the "data to back that up", I want you to confirm whether that is still necessary.
Do you deny the problem of income inequality, do you oppose the basic economic tenants of the Democratic Party?
Do you actually think people are doing well on the trickle down status quo?
I would certainly hope not.

I'm glad you care about income inequality, it's an issue Democrats have been looking at for a while now.

I have a few questions for you. True or false, income inequality did start to shrink under Obama? True or false, under Republicans income inequality has widened? Do you think income inequality is more likely to shrink or expand under Democrat policies? Do you think electing more Democrats so that they have accrual political power in Washington will allow them to improve income inequality or do you think electing more independents to weaken both dems and repubs power in Washington will improve things?

 

[Jaskalas]

This is your first mention of income inequality per se. I merely point out that we've done fairly well in the aftermath of the Ownership society looting spree despite the efforts of the Party of No. Your claim that all the jobs created in the wake of that are shit jobs obviously isn't true.

Yes, I'm glad it's more of an apples to oranges sort of thing. I'll completely agree with you that the economy recovered from recession, but we might have disagreements on what sort of economy we have today. To that end, I previously said this:

Let's say you are correct in that assessment of "balance".
Problem is there has been a decline in labor for the past 40 years. A trend that is only going to accelerate as automation kicks in. This is not a time for balance, as people find themselves in painful positions of hopelessness right now due to a systemic failure in our system.

• Suicide rates are highest for men in their 50s
• Appalachia: The big white ghetto
  
• Stores are closing at an epic pace
• Most Millennials Are Finding It Hard to Transition Into Adulthood
• 'The millennial side hustle,' not stable job, is the new reality
• America’s Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Replaced by Robots
• Inequality in America is getting worse according to top economists

The conclusion is that "normal" is a disaster, "balance" is a disaster. It is time for a revolution to match these changes.
We need to expand safety nets so that they actually work, and not be called socialists by the DNC Congressional leader.

I do not stand on an idea that the economy is healthy today, and much of it has to do with the value those jobs fail to provide.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

If i recall, what Jesus said was "those that would not that I should rule over me, bring them before me and slay them."

And given what pretty much every Christian believes, Jesus isn't merciful, he just prefers to torture people for eternity after they die instead of temporally before they die. Terrible example, @Moonbeam; the God of the Abrahamic religions is a cross between Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If i recall, what Jesus said was "those that would not that I should rule over me, bring them before me and slay them."

And given what pretty much every Christian believes, Jesus isn't merciful, he just prefers to torture people for eternity after they die instead of temporally before they die. Terrible example, @Moonbeam; the God of the Abrahamic religions is a cross between Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un.

Well that's a quote but absolutely without any backstory or context. Why don't you explain it?

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

Why don't you open your Bible to the Gospel of Luke chapter 19 and read it?

This is one of those times you don't need any fucking context, Hayabusa. No one says that, in any context, if they aren't a power-mad psychopath.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yes, I'm glad it's more of an apples to oranges sort of thing. I'll completely agree with you that the economy recovered from recession, but we might have disagreements on what sort of economy we have today. To that end, I previously said this:



I do not stand on an idea that the economy is healthy today, and much of it has to do with the value those jobs fail to provide.

Which justifies your attacks on the only political party working to change it for the better not at all.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Why don't you open your Bible to the Gospel of Luke chapter 19 and read it?

This is one of those times you don't need any fucking context, Hayabusa. No one says that, in any context, if they aren't a power-mad psychopath.

I did read it. It was a story about someone else and how they responded, not Jesus telling others to go out and kill others. If one does not "need" context then very often is what they mean is that they already have their mind made up and not confuse them with facts. The context you think unnecessary was a parable, a story, about a king who was betrayed and what happened upon his return. But you made it about something Jesus said, as if he ordered others to be grabbed off the street who weren't with the program, sinners, but right before he went against the leadership and people who didn't want to understand and ate with the same people you say Jesus wanted to execute.

If you had read the chapter you would have seen Jesus meeting with a tax collector immediately before the parable. In those days tax collecters took more than was their obligation and were well off as a result. He was a thief and Jesus was getting crap about going to his home. The last verse of that was "For the Son of Man came to seek and save the lost". Be irate but don't be lazy to get there.

 

[Jaskalas]

Which justifies your attacks on the only political party working to change it for the better not at all.

When? In this thread, what could possibly be construed as such? Let's see...

As a progressive, who needs enemies when you have friends like the DNC?

I started by slamming Pelosi for her calling the progressive movement anti Capitalist. She marked herself a staunch opponent of the help we need to give the American people. I'll understand if she is too senile to know what she is saying these days, but the DNC has kept her on as the Congressional Leader. The DNC does this country and the progressive movement a HUGE disservice to stand by Pelosi and to continue to allow her to lead it.

With leaders attacking progressives, who needs enemies? See, I did not attack a party but specific bad actors within it. Then senseamp says Democrats offer balance but I remark how balance is not what is needed. Our people cry out for change, for policies to help them. The reoccurring theme of this thread, and the entire post-election discussion, is that Sanders tapped into a progressive energy that this country is desperate for. Do not let regressive forces block that path. Embrace it and reignite the hope and change that propelled Obama forward in 2008.

This is not about whether Democrats are better than Republicans... but whether they embracing the voters who want change. Whether they are willing to tap into the same energy that wins elections. What good is playing moderate if that "balance" is more of the same? The defender of the status quo, a servant of Wall Street and their influence? That weakness gave Trump an opening to win. Do not let it continue to harm Democrats and the nation.

The pending anti-Trump wave is the perfect opportunity to redefine Democrats as something bold that will help people. Telling us the economy is fine.... is to continue to ignore reality, and to shut those voters out. This topic is a plea to do the right thing.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

@Hayabusa Rider: again, you miss the point here, which is that no context possibly justifies this from a being that is supposedly infinitely good and infinitely powerful and absolutely sovereign. If such a being had a problem with tax collectors, for example, it would literally be no effort at all to arrange reality such that such a thing never existed.

Furthermore, when the guy doing the saving is the guy whose eternal temper tantrums you're being saved from, that's not a "gift." That's fucking blackmail.

 

[Jhhnn]

When? In this thread, what could possibly be construed as such? Let's see...



I started by slamming Pelosi for her calling the progressive movement anti Capitalist. She marked herself a staunch opponent of the help we need to give the American people. I'll understand if she is too senile to know what she is saying these days, but the DNC has kept her on as the Congressional Leader. The DNC does this country and the progressive movement a HUGE disservice to stand by Pelosi and to continue to allow her to lead it.

With leaders attacking progressives, who needs enemies? See, I did not attack a party but specific bad actors within it. Then senseamp says Democrats offer balance but I remark how balance is not what is needed. Our people cry out for change, for policies to help them. The reoccurring theme of this thread, and the entire post-election discussion, is that Sanders tapped into a progressive energy that this country is desperate for. Do not let regressive forces block that path. Embrace it and reignite the hope and change that propelled Obama forward in 2008.

This is not about whether Democrats are better than Republicans... but whether they embracing the voters who want change. Whether they are willing to tap into the same energy that wins elections. What good is playing moderate if that "balance" is more of the same? The defender of the status quo, a servant of Wall Street and their influence? That weakness gave Trump an opening to win. Do not let it continue to harm Democrats and the nation.

The pending anti-Trump wave is the perfect opportunity to redefine Democrats as something bold that will help people. Telling us the economy is fine.... is to continue to ignore reality, and to shut those voters out. This topic is a plea to do the right thing.

Pelosi didn't say that-

https://twitter.com/cnn/status/826630451125174273?lang=en

Nice dig at Dems for keeping her, though.

The "servant of Wall St" is a nice slam, too.

You've done much the same throughout this thread & others.

Nobody said the economy is fine. I said we've come a long way since 2008 despite Repub obstructionism.

 

[Jaskalas]

Pelosi didn't say that-

https://twitter.com/cnn/status/826630451125174273?lang=en

http://observer.com/2017/04/nancy-pelosi-pro-sanders-primary-challenger-stephen-jaffe/

Read what was written in the observer. That is what I picked up on and became angry at Pelosi over.
Given the video truth of it, I apologize for letting that mislead me on what was actually said.
Thank you for finding that.

 

[Jaskalas]

Nobody said the economy is fine. I said we've come a long way since 2008 despite Repub obstructionism.

You won't win bipartisan economic votes with that message. It needs to speak of bold action yet to come. If Trump attacking trade deals, and immigrants does not help them, you need to tell them policies that will. And they need to believe it.

 

[Sunburn74]

Income inequality indicators had just started to show signs of reversing thanks to Democrats raising taxes on the rich despite enormous opposition from the Republicans. The Democrats wanted to make even more drastic changes but were blocked by Republicans from doing so. Very smart of Americans to flee the Democrats into the open arms of Republicans.

It's based on the irrational belief that most Americans have that they are just a lucky shortfall or investment away from being millionaires themselves when in reality most wealth in this country is overwhelmingly generational. Ask low to middle class people what they think about the death tax (something that after affects only 5500 families in this country and is aimed and redistributing generational wealth, rather than let it sit idly unused and is aimed at curbing income inequality) and often the response is "well when I finally get my 10 million dollar mansion, I want to leave it to my kids without the government getting a piece". The reality is you're much more likely to start poor and end up rich in Canada than in the united States.

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm glad you care about income inequality, it's an issue Democrats have been looking at for a while now.

I have a few questions for you. True or false, income inequality did start to shrink under Obama? True or false, under Republicans income inequality has widened? Do you think income inequality is more likely to shrink or expand under Democrat policies? Do you think electing more Democrats so that they have accrual political power in Washington will allow them to improve income inequality or do you think electing more independents to weaken both dems and repubs power in Washington will improve things?

http://www.scholarsstrategynetwork....campaign-contributions-very-wealthy-americans

This is why your questions are meaningless and why Sanders had the message we need. It also shows why all your absurd attempts to define party equivalencies as a rationalization of stupid apologists is actually stupidity itself. Equal things equal each other in the real world. You focus on the difference in color between turds because your smelling apparatus is broken. You are running a partisan program with the usual blindness of bigotry. I believe in the good and there is a good, but what you call good is evil. Democracy is by the rich for the rich and of the rich. Wake up.