Eric does some detail discussion here. MP Prospects for DEMS in 2018
My comment was "I guess I am curious what platform Democrats will run on???
Will they stick with their tired old... regulate more, tax more, grow government, grow public employees unions, redistribute more, hold people accountable less, protect more people, handout more "fish", etc Or will they change it up some?"
Ray left a long well thought out comment, however I found this part most interesting. "I'm waiting, as are many others, for the Democrats to devise a coherent message that speaks to fairness for, if not everyone, then as many as possible. So far, I'm not seeing or hearing that. It's not a case of "Obama's legacy," at least not for me. I thought Obama, while president, was an articulate and principled moderate Republican, in the guise of a mainstream Democrat. The current GOP's right wing strikes me as neofascist, so I can't support most of what it advocates, and I'm reasonably well informed. I'm not impressed (that's as politely as I can phrase it) with either the Republican Congress or the Current Occupant, but there's plenty of room for improvement on both their parts."
My comment was "I guess I am curious what platform Democrats will run on???
Will they stick with their tired old... regulate more, tax more, grow government, grow public employees unions, redistribute more, hold people accountable less, protect more people, handout more "fish", etc Or will they change it up some?"
Ray left a long well thought out comment, however I found this part most interesting. "I'm waiting, as are many others, for the Democrats to devise a coherent message that speaks to fairness for, if not everyone, then as many as possible. So far, I'm not seeing or hearing that. It's not a case of "Obama's legacy," at least not for me. I thought Obama, while president, was an articulate and principled moderate Republican, in the guise of a mainstream Democrat. The current GOP's right wing strikes me as neofascist, so I can't support most of what it advocates, and I'm reasonably well informed. I'm not impressed (that's as politely as I can phrase it) with either the Republican Congress or the Current Occupant, but there's plenty of room for improvement on both their parts."
I mean David Brooks explained it well on PBS tonight. In essence he said that the DEMs should win a lot of seats in 2018 given how unpopular Trump and his supporters are. However as the DEMs go further Left, people like me may have to continue to choose the party that supports capitalism, not democratic socialism. Thoughts?
54 comments:
In essence he said that the DEMs should win a lot of seats in 2018 given how unpopular Trump and his supporters are.
Well, Brooks was never known as the brightest bulb on the tree. Did anyone think to ask him why Trump's unpopularity should spill over to the Congressional races? Republicans, have in fact, been very successful in distancing themselves from Trump, something Brooks should have been aware of before he went on TV
I wouldn't be shocked if Democrats gained a seat or two in the House next year. Stranger things have happened in our politics. But I would be shocked if we didn't lose seats in the senate.
--Hiram
It is an interesting question why voters don't link Trump to Republicans or their local Republican candidates. To someone like me, and Brooks I suppose, the connection is obvious. But the reality is, voters just don't see things that way. There are a lot of reasons for that, but for me, I think a large part of it is that voters just don't see Trump as a Republican. They see him as a way of disrupting the two party system of which Trump is a part. I don't see this disruption on the local level, at least not so far.
--Hiram
Actually, on the show there was consensus that Trump now controls the Republican party since so few them are willing to fight back or call him out for his erratic behavior / lies. And since the people who are willing to fight back are choosing not to run in 2018 because they think they will lose the primaries.
Therefore it is likely that most of the GOP candidates in 2018 will be Trump and/or Bannon supporters... Thus giving giving moderate DEMs a great chance to win.
However since the DEMs keep backing even further Left candidates... They may lose the opportunity to make big wins.
Thus giving giving moderate DEMs a great chance to win.
Most districts are gerrymandered and aren't realiztically in play. My experience with the third district, where that basically isn't the case is that Republicans are able to distance themselves from Trump with ease. People don't link nice, boring, Erik Paulsen with Trump. I know of nothing that can change that.
--Hiram
I get these emails from Erik Paulsen about tax reform, an incredibly dull subject. Now one basic problem is that there is little reason to think that tax reform will be better for the economy than the status quo. What is almost universally the case is that changes in the tax code benefit some and hurt others. There is a powerful tendency in tax law change to be a zero sum game. Deductibility of state taxes is an example. Whatever it's overall merits, it will hurt Minnesotans who will pay more in taxes. There are other examples of this. Repatriation of foreign profits, for example, could be a tremendous competitive boost for foreign companies at the expense of American companies that paid their taxes. In any event, the impact of tax reform is overestimated. It's sort of like a flea which tries to wag the tail of a dog but doesn't know in which direction to wag it.
But the boringness, and even the ineffectiveness of the tax issues which apparently obsess Paulsen work to his advantage. After all, how could such a boring guy be a Trump supporter? I mean, he wears wire rim glasses, for gosh sakes? The guy even visibly trembles when the words "Donald Trump" are mentioned. This seems to be what goes over in the third district where they like their politicians to give an impression of seriousness. It is a winning strategy, one to which I don't have a response, but one that ensures Republican control of the House.
--Hiram
about your view of democrats:
"Will they stick with their tired old... regulate more, tax more, grow government, grow public employees unions, redistribute more, hold people accountable less, protect more people, handout more "fish", etc Or will they change it up some?"
I don't think regular people see the party that way. I think many people are more likely to see the democrats as the party protecting immigrants and LGBT citizens and advocating for black lives matter. Many white people do not identify and support these issues/ causes and don't pay attention to all the ways democrats promote policies that benefit everyone.
For me the first reason that comes to my mind is under which party will I be able to collect my full or increased social security benefit when I retire? I think the huge tax cut the republicans are promoting puts my SS at risk. I also think about under which party will my students and their families be able to access health care. Which party will attempt to do something to address climate change? My over all reason which includes many other issues is democrats support policies which benefit everyone while GOP is promoting policies which benefit corporations and the wealthy.
I just did a very small survey of one person (my hubby) about why he always votes for democrats over GOP. His top reasons are republicans promote policies to benefit corporations and the rich while democrats do more to assist poor people and also democrats do not effing lie like the republicans.
Lastly, I don agree with my spouse with his concern about the level of misinformation that we have reached with republicans in control.
I was just reading an article about a wapo opinion poll and came across this:
"Democrats have a clear advantage in public trust, with 56 percent of Americans saying they think the party generally represents their political views, compared with 43 percent of Americans saying the Republican Party does the same. A 55 percent majority says the Republican Party mainly opposes their views, and 60 percent say the same of Trump."
These views should help dems in the elections, but considering all the factors mentioned in the MP article working against the dems and also the high skill level the GOP and its allies have in smearing people I am not hopeful.
I am currently taking the PEW political typology poll and cannot decide between these 2 positions.
"Racial discrimination is the main reason why many black people can't get ahead these days
Blacks who can't get ahead in this country are mostly responsible for their own condition"
I blame John for influencing my views, as I am having trouble on other questions as well.
another question that John has made difficult for me to answer:
Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they're willing to work hard
Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people
Most of the other questions are actually quite easy for me. I will likely post one or more comments on this survey once I have my political type. If you want to take it google PEW and it pops right up.
According to this survey I came out solid liberal, but I think I lean a little bit towards opportunity democrat. I looked through the data at the end and according to their typology the country is various shades of dem, over various shades of republican 51% to 42%, so why do the dems keep losing elections? I blame imbalance in the media.
Laurie,
I am happy to hear that you are seeing gray in more areas... :-)
As for my "regulate more, tax more, grow government, grow public employees unions, redistribute more, hold people accountable less, protect more people, handout more "fish", etc "
I put DEM efforts in the LGBT, Reverse Discrimination, BLM, Illegal Workers, Weak Borders, etc in the "protect more people" category.
By the way, the desire by Liberals to call visa over stayers and border jumpers immigrants is sad and laughable. Maybe if someone "breaks into your house and takes your property" you will call them a "guest who took gifts"...
The DEM efforts to support SS, SSD, Medicare, Medicaid, et can fit into several of my categories.
And the DEM efforts to control businesses, emissions, power sources, etc surely fits into more regulations.
I'll avoid discussing "lies more", however I find this interesting...
"republicans promote policies to benefit corporations and the rich while democrats do more to assist poor people"
You should ask him what the citizens in the USA will do to earn a living when the DEMs have made it so expensive to do business here, that even more jobs leave?
Have you ever told him about my views on your Prius purchase? (ie anti-UAW, anti-USA taxes, anti-USA Research and Development, anti-USA workers in general, etc) All so that you personally could save some money. No insult intended since I own a couple foreign vehicles, just a perspective)
Does he buy foreign or domestic? Just curious...
From my perspective those corporations employ a huge number of us and keep the USA competitive in an intensely competitive global market. He can kill the golden geese at his own hazard.
You Will Lose Your Job to a Robot—and Sooner Than You Think
I expect that my link will be treated dismissively. I find it very intriguing.
Laurie,
The Left can blame corporations and capitalism all they want, however as I continue to try to hammer home over and over...
It is the consumers who decides which jobs go away.
You and millions of others bought a prius to save money and get a great car... US jobs were reduced and Unions lost power.
If people hire driverless Uber cars to save money, jobs will go away.
So what will it take for our citizens to willingly spend more money to support the jobs of their fellow citizens?
Speaking of which I am in Shanghai again, helping these folks to install our test equipment so they can develop better vehicles that will some day compete in the USA...
I have no doubt that machines and computers will continue to take jobs from many... Especially those who fail to take advantage of the massive investment that us citizens make in the area of free or reduced cost education. That is why I am so adamant that we stop enabling them by putting food in their trough while demanding nothing in return.
It is just like a parent spoiling a child and allowing them to stay immature, it may make the parent feel good for awhile... However it is in no way helping the child prepare for when they are forced to become independent.
After AI puts nearly all of us out of work it will be interesting to see how society deals with this. Will we still have class based society or will inequality be greatly decreased. Will my special ed students receive the same monthly income as my well educated sons? Or will most of us be unemployed and destitute? I think a merit-less, classless society would be hard to for John to accept. I do expect the super rich will always be with us.
Laurie, You speak as if a merit based society is in some way a bad thing...
Meritocracy Defined
1. an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent rather than on class privilege or wealth.
2. a system in which such persons are rewarded and advanced:
The dean believes the educational system should be a meritocracy.
3. leadership by able and talented persons. "
Now even in our most idealistic future society... "Star Trek" There are still Ship Captains, merit based testing to achieve positions, etc.
In your ideal world should your special ed kids be given everything that your sons have had to work to earn?
Should those who choose to not learn, work and make good choices be treated exactly the same as your sons are who learned, worked and make good choices?
By the way, I notice that you are avoiding the gorilla in the room...
It is us consumers who will choose what happens when and who looses their jobs.
Given the American consumer's history of making self centered choices, it is likely that low cost high quality great performance providers will continue to be rewarded. (ie merit based)
Whether that means job are lost to foreign workers or robots.
The big question as I have repeatedly said is...
How do we as a society minimize the percentage of low merit people in America?
or
How do we as a society maximize the percentage of high merit people in America?
Our society will always do better if a greater percentage of people are pulling the wagon. That way the people who truly need to be in the wagon will receive better care.
I don't think star trek gives us much insight into imagining what the not too distant future will be like.
one possible future is that we will all be living a life of leisure in which case where does merit enter in.
another possible future is the robot's will decide there is no reason to have us humans around.
I think I may be around long enough to see some of the downside of the coming mass unemployment.
I hope our future is better than you believe.
However I do agree that many of the low merit citizens will find it hard to find good paying simple jobs... I hope they start improving their merits and capabilities.
Countries with futures don't elect Donald Trumps.
--Hiram
"Thus giving giving moderate DEMs a great chance to win."
Like Hillary Clinton?
I'm someone who would be classified as a "moderate Democrat" by most folks. Yet, I'm also aware that if you look at election results from the Obama years, it's the "moderate Democrats" that have been the ones losing a lot of these races from the state/local level on up.
For instance, the at one time much-heralded Blue Dog caucus has been wiped out -- currently at 18, down from a high of 54 in 2006. Evan Bayh, who's about the most moderate of moderate Democrats, got wiped out by 10 points in the Indiana Senate race last year.
Having a Republican -- who's party has run further and further to the right while winning more seats -- tell Democrats about the need to run to the center is pretty much the definition of concern trolling.
It's a problem. It's not as if we are losing these races by big margin, a fact that we don't quite know what to do with. On a larger scale, we won the presidential vote by a pretty significant margin yet Hillary Clinton isn't the president. It's a paradox, and goes along way to illuminating the the frequent Fox talking point to the effect that we don't know why we lost the 2016 election, one that I happen to agree with, by the way.
--Hiram
I think that Hillary lost because she went Left to try to chase the Bernie Democratic Socialist voters, and then a lot of them did not show up to vote in the closest states.
Remember that I really really really did not want to vote for Trump... However Hillary's doubling down on ACA, free post HS education, women's absolute abortion freedom, LGBTQ rights trounce religious rights, BLM folks are heroes, Cops are suspect, use gov't to take more from the successful to give to the unsuccessful with no improvement requirements, more government regs and intrusion is good, etc is just too much for many in the middle.
If the DEMs keep with these messages, it will be a hard sell in the heartland of America.
"Remember that I really really really did not want to vote for Trump... However Hillary's"
It ain't Hillary's fault, dude. You knew what Donald Trump was and you filled in the circle anyway.
I have still been having fun imagining the future under with AI robots doing all the work. Even though I predict a dystopian future it is still fun to speculate. While no one here seems interested in this topic I am going to throw in another K Drum link anyway.
A Different Take: Our Robot Hellscape Awaits Us
I tried this topic on my family over the weekend and they didn't get the scope of the change that is coming in the not to distant future either. My older son who is visiting and planning a career change into computer science may humor me and speculate on this a bit when he is around.
Sean,
When our 2 party system gives us 2 choices...
1. Bad (Trump - Capitalistic Obnoxious Pig)
2. Worse (Clinton - Uptight More Government is the Solution Prude)
I think there is plenty of blame to be spread around.
I accept responsibility for my choice, however I do not accept responsibility for the options I was provided...)
Laurie, It is 8:45 AM here. Time to go meet customers.
I'll read your link later.
I am at the Hilton in Hangzhou. It is on a lake and BEAUTIFUL... Once in awhile business travel can be nice. :-)
I can't believe you still see Clinton as a worse choice than Trump. Makes your judgement look extremely questionable. I don't see how your sexist views, referring to her as a prude are relevant to who would be a better president.
Silly question...
Why do you think I would have been more satisfied with Hillary as President?
Secondly... I call Trump a pig, and you think I am insulting Hillary by calling her a prude.
Maybe I used the wrong word... Prude: "a person who is or claims to be easily shocked by matters relating to sex or nudity." Since she seemed to have little concern for Bill's victims.
Now I do agree that Hillary would have been more Presidential and Professional, but that does not help when she is fighting for things that I disagree with.
It's just useful to understand all the things you're willing to excuse -- playing footsie with white supremacists, disregard for the rule of law and political norms, vast disrespect for wide swaths of the American people -- in order to get tax cuts. Maybe you need to update all your charts about your principles and striving for balance to reflect that.
I can't believe how blind you are to how unfit Trump is to be president. I could post many links explaining to you how dangerous he is to the country but it would be a huge waste of time and I have work to do tonight.
well, I am still avoiding getting to work but don't want to put time and energy in to typing up my views when I can just cut and paste things I agree with - like thoughts from K Drum about what is worrisome at this time.
"it’s bigger than Trump. It’s more like a slow but steady rise in my unease about the future of my country. Is Trump going to turn out to be a blip, with the ship righted and returning to course in 2020? Or is Trump a harbinger of things to come?
I used to be pretty sure it was the former, but I’m less sure now. The ability of Trump to tweet out his version of alternate reality and have it accepted without question by his base is increasingly scary. It’s obvious that he doesn’t care if all the rest of us know it’s nonsense. It’s not meant for us. And no matter how crazy it gets, Fox News is willing to amplify it; congressional Republicans are willing to ignore it; and his true-believer core laps it up. If that core is enough to power Trump to a reelection win in 2020, we’re in serious trouble even if he doesn’t start a nuclear war or destroy the rule of law."
in his next paragraph he continues about the coming wave of unemployment compounds his worries -but as that is related to his topic of AI, which no here cares about I left that out.
What worries me is the dems really seem to be lacking in leadership and not up to the challenges that we are facing.
Now please remember:
I did not like the idea of Donald Trump as President and do not like Donald Trump as President...
But that does mean that I should vote for a candidate who supports Democratic Socialism (adding more feed to trough), killing fetus with no limits, additional regulations to stifle the competitiveness of American employers, etc.
Let's hope we survive Trump and the parties do better next time.
Which brings us back to the beginning...
"I guess I am curious what platform Democrats will run on???
Will they stick with their tired old... regulate more, tax more, grow government, grow public employees unions, redistribute more, hold people accountable less, protect more people, handout more "fish", etc Or will they change it up some?"
If the USA and it's citizens want to maintain the best standard of living in the world and stay a dominant world power... We need to find a way to get every possible person out of the wagon, so they can help pull it...
Now we know from the last fifty years that just putting free food in the trough is not the answer. We need to do better.
"I did not like the idea of Donald Trump as President and do not like Donald Trump as President..."
You voted for him!
You need to take a look inside yourself and do some introspection. You love to strut around like a moral peacock, talking about principles and tell people who is virtuous and who isn't. Yet, you voted for a guy who stands in opposition to every moral value you claim to believe in. And you refuse to accept responsibility for it. You have no standing to compare other people to animals when you refuse to hold yourself accountable for your actions.
You could have voted for Evan McMullin. You could have written somebody in. You could have not voted on the Presidential line. You had options other than voting for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, and didn't choose them. You picked, and now you have to live with your support of this guy. You don't get to wash your hands of him and blame everyone else but yourself for it.
Like us or not, does anyone doubt that we have our issues? We will run on stuff we have always run on, health care, the environment, women's rights, that sort of thing. I don't know that any of that has changed in the last three months.
Republicans have a projection problem. They are an essentially negative party which is fine, but they project that negativity on Democrats, and they don't seem to recognize that. Consider what has been going on recently. After years of campaigning on repealing and replacing Obamacare, once in control of all three branches of governments Republicans found they could do neither. Why? Because what they found is that while opposed to Obamacare, they had nothing to replace it. They didn't because are a negative, not a positive party. The same is now true for tax reform. After years of demanding tax cuts, it turns out that Republicans aren't in agreement about how either taxex will be cut, or how they will pay for them. A substantial part of the Republican Party doesn't even believe they should paid for at all, because, as I understand it, it's our money. The logic of that one, I leave Republicans to parse.
Meanwhile, where's this free food everyone is talking about? Or is that just the logical consequences of the apparent fact that Republicans have no idea at all about how health care in America is paid for?
--Hiram
""I guess I am curious what platform Democrats will run on???"
I am curious when the Republican party will reckon with its moral and ideological bankruptcy. It spent the last eight years selling the American people on lies by the dump-truck load of what it would be able to do when it took power. Almost a year in, they have nothing to show for it.
Republicans will run on tax cuts and resentment. We will hear a lot about how condescending Democrats are and how much they enjoy quiche. We will hear a lot about double standards and hypocrisy. We will hear a lot about how Democrats don't get various messages. I expect we will be held responsible for how unpatriotic the NFL is.
--Hiram
Sean,
I'll have to give that some thought. My principles are there to guide my beliefs and behavior. And I do fail to attain my idealistic goals at time. However they are their to help refocus me.
Now the idea of throwing away my vote because neither of the candidates meet my ideals seems very irrational. So I guess I will continue to plug my nose and select one of the front runners.
Hiram,
I assume the GOP will run on the normal stuff:
- lower taxes
- smaller government
- less power / money to public employees
- more personal responsibility of citizens
- improved business environment in USA
- fewer regulations
- tougher borders
- fewer fetuses killed
- honoring of religious freedom
- more law and order
Of course with this comes the dark side:
- LGBTQ constraints / shunning
- battle against in expensive and readily available birth control
Republicans run on lower taxes. That's about it.
--Hiram
You missed a few things:
I assume the GOP will run on the normal stuff:
- lower taxes primarily for the rich
- smaller government but not really
- less power / money to public employees so we can give more to the rich
- more personal responsibility of citizens except for the risk we socialize from the wealthy and corporations
- improved business environment in USA because we love corporate welfare
- fewer regulations because who needs clean water
- tougher borders but we don't like enforcing immigration law against our patrons
- fewer fetuses killed but we hate birth control
- honoring of religious freedom if you're Christian!
- more law and order for minorities and poor people
I LOVE AMERICA !!!
After a week in China, the freedom to have this disagreement in the public space is wonderful !!!!
"fewer fetuses killed but we hate birth control"
And now we can add, "plus we took away the tax credit for adoption".
Sean,
Do you truly approve of everything the Democrats do?
I personally like / dislike things about both parties, their representatives and their supporters.
However in our 2 party system I have to choose one when I go into the polling box if I want my vote to count. And as long as the DEMs keep standing for more government, more takes, more regulations, more welfare without improvement requirements, less law and order, etc, I am pretty well stuck with the idiots in the GOP. To do otherwise is to doom America to being less affluent, competitive and powerful in the future.
That is unless a 3rd party actually arises as the DEMs go Left and the GOP goes Right. Let's hear it for wishful thinking. :-)
"I am pretty well stuck with the idiots in the GOP."
I'm fine with strategic voting. But if you're going to claim the morals and principles that you do and still vote for a guy like Donald Trump who makes a mockery of many of those morals and principles, maybe you should be a little less judgmental about other people. Your moral high ground ain't as high as you think it is.
I think you are being a bit Black and White here...
It seems that you are saying that I should waste my vote on the idea of principle.
Instead of using it as best I can to protect the future of our country and my family.
Did you forget that I am an engineer? I research, evaluate, weight, analyze and take action. I'll leave emotional illogical idealism to others.
Also it is your perception that Hillary has a better character than Trump, and I think that is very questionable. She is quieter, but I would not trust her any further than I trust Trump.
It's interesting way of looking at things, "voting strategically". The people I hang out with can't figure out why anyone would vote for Trump. The guys just isn't someone, I think, most people respect or have any use for. He isn't a role model. He isn't someone we would like our children to grow up to be like. One hopes his picture isn't posted in America's classrooms. Polls show that most Americans view him as dishonest and untrustworthy. Despite these things he came not too far away from winning the popular vote, and because of peculiarities of our electoral system was actually elected president. How did sane, rational people vote for someone who surely they knew was unfit to be president; someone in their own neighborhood, they wouldn't allow to lit dropping for a local candidate? I guess we are learning.
--Hiram
"It seems that you are saying that I should waste my vote on the idea of principle."
No, I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that if you're willing to fungible on the idea of principles when it suits what you see as your interests, you should pause before you criticize other people for not always living up to what you see as the proper morals and principles.
I am always willing to give people a hand up.
I am not always willing to enable their continued dysfunction.
Have you ever studied the concept of co-dependency?
In my view Democrats support giving handouts to keep people fed and cared for over an indefinite time period. (no or weak work /education / behavioral requirements) (ie spoiling parent)
I simply expect that if the tax payers are paying them... They need to perform, behave, work and improve until they are independent... (ie tough love)
Post a Comment