2020 Election

Considering who currently occupies the White House, controls the Senate, the Supreme Court , and over two-thirds of state governorships and legislatures, maybe the Dems could take some pointers from them.

Of the many criticisms we could make of the Trump Administration, I don't think we could credibly say it's been "Same old, same old". He's brought unprecedented levels of divisiveness, corruption, incompetence, and racism to the White House and no matter how well the economy seems to be doing, this poses a clear and present danger to our survival and well-being. Our immediate challenge is to stop the bleeding: i.e., get rid of the S.O.B. It strikes me as Quixotic to say that before doing that we must fundamentally restructure the American political and economic system, and anything short of that is a waste of time.

The center of political gravity in the U.S. remains where it's always been: with the moderates. Those who think otherwise would do well to read Charles Lindblom's essay on "the science of muddling through" (Public Administration Review, 19:79-88 Spring,1959), explaining how ordinary people tend to favor incremental changes instead of comprehensive "synoptic" ones; and the social psychological literature on relative deprivation and comparative reference groups Relative deprivation, telling us that people feel advantaged or deprived on the basis of what they've known before and in relation to comparative reference groups who are close to them in socioeconomic status--not the lifestyles of the rich and famous. In the language of game theory, "minimax" (minimizing possible loss" is their preferred voting strategy.

 

I am not a republican and please don't insult me with that characterization. I am probably more liberal than you are. I am in favor of abolishing the second amendment, are you? I favor cutting the defense budget by 75 percent, do you. What I am is a realist.
I find it interesting that you, and the other Sanders supporters don't address the issue of a republican controlled congress.

 

You're a realist who favors abolishing the second amendment? Ooookkkkkaaaayyyy...

I just don't think it matters if the Republicans control congress. At least we'll be trying. What's the point of having a president who doesn't even try?

 

I don't know how old you are, but I am sixty five. I've lived thru the Nixon, Ray Gun, and Bush administrations. Even Democratic administrations say they are for the people. I have not seen that. Do you thing politicians are for the people?
I've never seen one turn down a pay raise.
Very few politicians have held a real job, so please tell me how they can relate to the common working person?
Idolizing a politician is being rather naive.
.

 

What's the point of trying if you can't get anything passed thru a legislature?

 

You establish a precedent.

 

I don't idolize anyone. I merely asked you a question based on what you said and how you reacted to that other post, since that reaction implied you agree Sanders is an unpragmatic idealist more so than a politician who only cares about himself.

I personally don't find him more unpragmatic than a voter that's for abolishing the second amendment And also has the suspicion he's not just in it for himself.

 

Precedents are accomplished by successful actions, not high-minded statements and failures.

 

Sanders is an unpragmatc idealist, and politician.
Note: I wasn't referring to you as someone who idolizes politicians, unlike others posting to this thread, that do.

makes no sense. I have the right to my opinion, and I am not running for political office.

 

The question is which ones represent business as usual or the status quo ? Those you mentioned were all products of the establishment therefore the same old business as usual is what Americans got.

Looking at the recent past all were status quo candidates so the end results were more of the same.

Doing the same thing every four years and hoping for different results is futile, not to mention a bit crazy.

If we always do what we've always done we'll always get what we've always gotten.

 

I didnt say you were a Republican, I said you were repeating Republican talking points. I'm not sure why since you're not a Republican.

I dont really want to get into a pissing contest about who is more liberal lol.

As far as needing a majority Democrat Congress, that's a given no matter who the president is.

 

You don't have to succeed to set a precedent. Just look at Trump. That bar is set pretty, pretty low.

 

So let me see if I understand your position
Vote for the most corporate candidate possible because they're all motivated by greed anyways
Vote for someone without any big ideas because there isnt going to be a Democratic majority in Congress to pass the ideas anyway

Have I got it right?

I bet you love John Delaney lol

 

Bernie did the same thing to a fellow democrat just the other night.

 

What's really interesting is the reaction to the shellac-ing Tulsi Gabbard delivered to Kamala Harris about her record as a prosecutor. She even accused her of withholding information that would have set death row inmates free and some other rather scathing stuff.

Today, the media says Gabbard is working for the Russians. Oddly, she wasn't labeled a racist for daring to challenge the integrity of a "POC" (which translates loosely, in Russian I guess, to "People who must never be questions nor criticized by non-POC people" or something to that effect).

The only reason I can see for trying to link her to the Russians is an odd effort to keep the Russia/Trump alive while using it as a bludgeon against an unruly democrat. They're eating their own folks.

 

But you said something that was not part of the assigned narrative, so you MUST be a republican. See how simple that is?

 

Actually, that's exactly what it seems you want to do. It's like saying "no offense" before delivering an offensive quip.

 

[

 

And what right wing talking point did he repeat

I'm just calling a spade a spade. If someone wants to repeat right wing talking points I'm happy to call them out for it.
Repeating talking points and using vague phrases like "pie in the sky" discourages rational, nuanced discussion

 

So what is to stop Russia from screwing with us again?

With the electorial college I don't see much changing. I hope I am wrong and I will have much more faith if Bernie makes it. I'm a monthly donner to his campaign. I really respect that man. He is smart, kind, and not afraid to do what is right. The famous picture of him getting arrested in the 60's helping black people says it all to me.