We're excited to present a great new set of boards to classic movie fans with tons of new features, stability, and performance.

If you’re new to the message boards, please “Register” to get started. If you want to learn more about the new boards, visit our FAQ.

Register

If you're a returning member, start by resetting your password to claim your old display name using your email address.

Re-Register

Thanks for your continued support of the TCM Message Boards.

X

Kyle Kersten was a true friend of TCM. One of the first and most active participants of the Message Boards, “Kyle in Hollywood” (aka, hlywdkjk) demonstrated a depth of knowledge and largesse of spirit that made him one of the most popular and respected voices in these forums. This thread is a living memorial to his life and love of movies, which remain with us still.

X

Jump to content


Photo

Future of Democratic Party?

What do Democrats need to do.

  • Please log in to reply
528 replies to this topic

#41 jamesjazzguitar

jamesjazzguitar

    There is nothing as bad as something not so bad

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,427 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 03 July 2017 - 04:55 PM

Valid point, but they also need to figure out how to get candidates who will get more votes than in past.  I have seen in the my area where the Dem candidates for some positions were real losers and wierdos.  Heck, I didn't even vote for them as a protest vote.

In addition, need to focus on state legislative races as much as Congressional, if not more.

 

As for getting more sound candidates than in the past:  this is where the DNC and Dem leaders like Pelosi come into play;  They can back (endorse \ provide funds to) a candidate in the Dem primary -  so will they back the best one?   (best one being the one most likely to beat the GOP candidate in the general election). 

 

I don't have faith in the judgment of the DNC or leaders like Pelosi in area;   Yea,  Pelosi is very good at raising funds but if, along with the DNC, those funds are spent on unwinnable candidates,  it is all for naught. 

 

As for State races;  Yes, Dems need to win there as well but I don't know how much the DNC has to do with that;  I assume each state has their own Dem organization that select which state candidates they wish to back.



#42 TheCid

TheCid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,346 posts
  • LocationSouth Carolina

Posted 03 July 2017 - 03:47 PM

Good luck with that;  In 2016 Ryan won 65% of the vote with the Dem, Solen,  winning 30.5%. 

 

This is like the GOP running a candidate to take Pelosi's San Fran district!   NOT going to happen.     

 

Note that the Dem party leaders would be fools to spend outside (national) funds on assisting Bryce.   Much better to spend dollars in states\districts where the margin of victor for the GOP candidate in the 2016 election was <10%.

 

Therefore is that post is related to the Future of the Dem Party,  the Dems are toast.  

Valid point, but they also need to figure out how to get candidates who will get more votes than in past.  I have seen in the my area where the Dem candidates for some positions were real losers and wierdos.  Heck, I didn't even vote for them as a protest vote.

In addition, need to focus on state legislative races as much as Congressional, if not more.



#43 jamesjazzguitar

jamesjazzguitar

    There is nothing as bad as something not so bad

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,427 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 02 July 2017 - 04:34 PM

The Ironworker Running to Unseat Paul Ryan Wants Single-Payer Health Care, $15 Minimum Wage-

 

Randy Bryce on his plans for winning Paul Ryan's seat, his viral first campaign video, and all the many articles casting him as a character in a Bruce Springsteen song....

 

 

 

Good luck with that;  In 2016 Ryan won 65% of the vote with the Dem, Solen,  winning 30.5%. 

 

This is like the GOP running a candidate to take Pelosi's San Fran district!   NOT going to happen.     

 

Note that the Dem party leaders would be fools to spend outside (national) funds on assisting Bryce.   Much better to spend dollars in states\districts where the margin of victor for the GOP candidate in the 2016 election was <10%.

 

Therefore is that post is related to the Future of the Dem Party,  the Dems are toast.  


  • TheCid likes this

#44 mr6666

mr6666

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,607 posts

Posted 02 July 2017 - 03:50 PM

The Ironworker Running to Unseat Paul Ryan Wants Single-Payer Health Care, $15 Minimum Wage-

 

Randy Bryce on his plans for winning Paul Ryan's seat, his viral first campaign video, and all the many articles casting him as a character in a Bruce Springsteen song....

 

http://billmoyers.co...seat-paul-ryan/

 


  • Bogie56 likes this

"A small elephant is not a rabbit."


#45 Sepiatone

Sepiatone

    Enhanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,493 posts
  • LocationLincoln Park, MI

Posted 30 June 2017 - 09:42 AM

Didja ever notice that when you see most photos of Trump, he's holding his hands out as if he just completed a TAP DANCE?

 

I guess that's true, in a way....

 

Sepiatone


I started out with NOTHING...and still have most of it left!


#46 darkblue

darkblue

    child of vision

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,237 posts

Posted 30 June 2017 - 03:42 AM


White Knights, Manginas and Simps, oh my!

#47 Sepiatone

Sepiatone

    Enhanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,493 posts
  • LocationLincoln Park, MI

Posted 29 June 2017 - 09:41 AM

I'd suggest that since WILL ROGERS once said, "I don't belong to any organized political party.  I'm a DEMOCRAT!"  that the dems are back to what they've always been.

 

 

Sepiatone


I started out with NOTHING...and still have most of it left!


#48 Bogie56

Bogie56

    Prof. Knucklehead

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10,182 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 29 June 2017 - 09:32 AM

I'm not really a fan of Dore.  His horse is too high for my taste.

Essentially this is give up the strategy of trying to steal Republican voters and make policy to attract progressives.  Unfortunately Dore never lets anyone speak for themselves and just goes on and on which dilutes any positive message.


  • mr6666 and TheCid like this

#49 Hibi

Hibi

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,668 posts
  • LocationOhio

Posted 28 June 2017 - 04:26 PM

I saw him on some news show the other night. Think it was Steve O'Donnell. I liked him.


  • TheCid likes this

#50 mr6666

mr6666

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,607 posts

Posted 28 June 2017 - 04:14 PM

"It's an Election, Not an Auction": Working-Class Challenger Opposes Paul Ryan and Big Money in Politics-

 

"...Randy Bryce, who is currently running to take Paul Ryan's seat in the First Congressional District in Wisconsin.

 

....Paul Ryan should be representing people. He hasn't had any public town halls in the district for over 600 days. But, he has had over 50 big-dollar fundraisers where you pay $10,000 to get your picture taken with him. He is not doing his job. That is the bigger issue. And based on him doing things like taking away health care, he has reason not to want to face the people in this district. I don't blame him being afraid to show his face, because a lot of people are upset and angry. But that is the number one thing. How can you represent people you don't want to see?

 

....This whole divide-and-conquer thing really has people upset; talking about making America great again, that doesn't happen by dividing us. It has never helped make us great. What makes us great is bringing up the "united" part of the United States.

People are having a lot of buyer's remorse. Donald Trump had a message that resonated with some working people, but I said, "Just wait and see. He is not going to do any of it. It sounds good, but he is not going to do any of it because he is not one of us."...

 

 

It is just seeing what we can do together. It is basically, people are understanding that you line up all the pawns on one side of a chessboard and you have a queen on the other side and there is only one result, but you need all the pawns to stay together. People are waking up and it is great to see....

 

http://www.truth-out...ney-in-politics


  • TheCid likes this

"A small elephant is not a rabbit."


#51 mr6666

mr6666

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,607 posts

Posted 28 June 2017 - 03:36 PM

Memo to Democrats: You Need A Clear Message for Universal Health Care-

 

"...how many people know, understand or even care what an “individual mandate” is? How about insurance “exchanges”? Or the “public option”? These technical terms and phrases have obscured more than they have clarified. They have also played into the hands of the Republicans,...

 

 

"....the NHS is and what it stands for. There is no need for “individual mandates”; no concept of “pre-existing conditions.” The NHS was founded, the legendary Labour health secretary and proud socialist Aneurin Bevan explained in 1948, on three core principles: that it “meet the needs of everyone,” that it “be free at the point of delivery,” and that it be based on “need, not ability to pay.”....

 

If the rest of the West treats health care as a right, not a privilege, why doesn’t the United States? If countries such as the United Kingdom and Canada can offer a viable and popular model of free health care for all, why shouldn’t the United States?

These are the very simple and direct questions that Democrats should be asking of their Republican opponents — and of the American people.....

 

https://theintercept...sal-healthcare/


"A small elephant is not a rabbit."


#52 Vautrin

Vautrin

    Quel siecle a mains!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,816 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 27 June 2017 - 03:12 PM

Just saw an article about this in the paper. Some of the Koch folks are

mad at the GOP because they haven't been successful so far in the

Koch's two main goals--repealing Obamacare and tax reform. One rich

guy from Texas was approached by Meadows about doing a fund raiser

and told Marky to pound sand until they get something done. Ouch.


  • TheCid likes this

Curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid get.


#53 TheCid

TheCid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,346 posts
  • LocationSouth Carolina

Posted 27 June 2017 - 11:58 AM

James Hohmann has an informative article on the Koch Brothers and their assoicates.  Just concluded their summer meeting in Colorado Springs.

 

Basically, they have not been successful in getting Republicans in Washington to change things their way, but they have been very successful at helping extreme conservative Republicans gain control of state and local governments.  They have been more successful with these Republican politicians in addressing their agendas.

 

This is the real threat to the Democratic Party.  Without a good base in the states and counties, they will not be able to effectively replace and counter the Republicans anywhere.  

More importantly, it means they will not have a bench that they can get elected to state and national offices.

 

I have little confidence that Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders, Warren, et. al. will be able to counteract this situation.  And it is not just about money, it is about the "face" of the Democratic Party.

 

washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/06/27/daily-202-thwarted-in-washington-the-koch-network-racks-up-conservative-victories-in-the-states/5951647ce9b69b2fb981de5d/?utm_term=.c328f9e71856

 

 



#54 Bogie56

Bogie56

    Prof. Knucklehead

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10,182 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 27 June 2017 - 07:19 AM



#55 mr6666

mr6666

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,607 posts

Posted 25 June 2017 - 03:19 PM

 

then there's Joe :unsure:


  • TheCid, Bogie56 and Princess of Tap like this

"A small elephant is not a rabbit."


#56 TheCid

TheCid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,346 posts
  • LocationSouth Carolina

Posted 24 June 2017 - 09:36 AM

Another great column by Cokie and Steve Roberts in The Future is Here.  Also titled Our Political Future is Here in some places.

uexpress.com/cokie-and-steven-roberts/2017/6/21/the-future-has-arrived

 

The column is about the Wisconsin gerrymandering case advancing to the Supreme Court. Interesting aspect is that conservative justice Anthony Kennedy may lean toward siding with liberal justices this time.  Primarily due to the egregious manner in which the Republican Party has used its power and domination in redistricting at the state level.  This would include state and Congressional districts, although the case is about state legislative districts.

 

While it won't matter much in states such as AL, MS, SC, etc., it may matter in most other states.

 

While I support the ACA, it occurs to me that maybe it was politically the greatest mistake the Democrats made.  Coupled with an African-American president, the Republicans at all levels were able to leverage them to recruit many voters to their side in elections after 2008.  Not to mention the billions of dollars from individuals and organizations.

 

 

 

 



#57 jamesjazzguitar

jamesjazzguitar

    There is nothing as bad as something not so bad

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,427 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 23 June 2017 - 05:58 PM

It was a mistake for the Dems to seriously believe they were going to have a victory.  It was right for them to compete, but they appeared too sure of themselves.  Of course that could have been political hyperbole.  But in essence they wasted Millions they do not have in GA.

As for the ratio, I'm not sure it was actually 5 to 1.  When you add in all the other groups and private donors and in-kind, etc., probably closer to 50/50 or 60/40.

Another aspect is that it indicates the 2018 races will probably not be about Trump, at least not as much as Dem leadership believes.

As you indicated, if a seat has been held by a very conservative Republican for last 10-20 years, not likely the voters will change to a Democrat even if they do not like Trump.  Of course that does not take into consideration that Trump could really do some stupid things and drag the GOP down.

But these districts and some states have been solidly Republican for decades.  As you said, the Dems have got to quit making mistakes.  The Dem candidates must be honestly seen as reflections of the interests of their states and districts.  Not reflective of national Dems, VT, MA or CA.  (No offense, but some here seem to think people from those states are future of Dem party.)

As for tunrnout, that is what put Trump into office.  The Dems have historically been weak at getting the vote out except in presidential elections.  That is how GOP took over House in 2010-Dem voters stayed home; GOP voters didn't.

Not only do the Dems have to gain 24 House seats and several Senate seats, they have to keep the ones they have in 2018 and 2020.  That may be difficult.

 

I agree with what you say here except 'Trump could really do some stupid things';    COULD???

 

I would bet the ranch on that one!    :lol:


  • TheCid likes this

#58 TheCid

TheCid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,346 posts
  • LocationSouth Carolina

Posted 23 June 2017 - 03:25 PM

It appears you believe it was a mistake for Dems outside of that GA district to outspend the GOP by over a 5 to 1 ratio in an election where the odds of winning were slim to none.    

 

To me this Dem party leadership decision is another example of Dem arrogance as it relates to all-things-Trump.   E.g. Clinton NOT visiting Wisconsin because her team believe that was in the bag.    

 

Trump is clearly bringing down the GOP and there is much upside for the Dems as it relates to the 2018 mid-terms (but mostly in the House).    But as we have discussed it will still be difficult for the Dems to gain the necessary House seat.   Many victory margins will be razor thin.      The Dems can't afford many more strategic blunders if they wish to prevail regardless of how poorly Trump is viewed or how low his approval ratings go leading up to November 2018.

 

Losing by less in 2018 than they did in previous elections is NOT prevailing.     (something you know but I'm not sure the Dem leadership does after those silly statements by Pelosi).

 

(PS: as for voter turnout;   Dems should be able to get the best voter turnout in a midterm in election history,  if they don't that is another example of Dem party leadership failure).

It was a mistake for the Dems to seriously believe they were going to have a victory.  It was right for them to compete, but they appeared too sure of themselves.  Of course that could have been political hyperbole.  But in essence they wasted Millions they do not have in GA.

As for the ratio, I'm not sure it was actually 5 to 1.  When you add in all the other groups and private donors and in-kind, etc., probably closer to 50/50 or 60/40.

Another aspect is that it indicates the 2018 races will probably not be about Trump, at least not as much as Dem leadership believes.

As you indicated, if a seat has been held by a very conservative Republican for last 10-20 years, not likely the voters will change to a Democrat even if they do not like Trump.  Of course that does not take into consideration that Trump could really do some stupid things and drag the GOP down.

But these districts and some states have been solidly Republican for decades.  As you said, the Dems have got to quit making mistakes.  The Dem candidates must be honestly seen as reflections of the interests of their states and districts.  Not reflective of national Dems, VT, MA or CA.  (No offense, but some here seem to think people from those states are future of Dem party.)

As for tunrnout, that is what put Trump into office.  The Dems have historically been weak at getting the vote out except in presidential elections.  That is how GOP took over House in 2010-Dem voters stayed home; GOP voters didn't.

Not only do the Dems have to gain 24 House seats and several Senate seats, they have to keep the ones they have in 2018 and 2020.  That may be difficult.



#59 mr6666

mr6666

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,607 posts

Posted 23 June 2017 - 12:39 PM

Prominent Democratic Fundraisers Realign to Lobby for Trump’s Agenda-

 

 

"....Democratic insiders who worked on Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential bid weren’t necessarily relegated to the sidelines. Many, in fact, are cashing in as lobbyists — by working to advance Trump’s agenda.

 

Lobbying records show that some Democratic fundraisers, who raised record amounts of campaign cash for Clinton, are now retained by top telecom interests to help repeal the strong net neutrality protections established during the Obama administration.

Others are working on behalf of for-profit prisons on detention issues, while others still are paid to help corporate interests pushing alongside Trump to weaken financial regulations.

At least one prominent Clinton backer is working for a health insurance company....

 

“When Democratic insiders team up with Comcast and the private prison industry, they make it pretty difficult to see how the party can rebuild relationships with the voters it needs to bring back into the fold.”

“Destroying the internet and maximizing the profitability of mass incarceration,” she added, “is not what I would call a winning strategy for Democrats who want to take back power in 2018.”

 

https://theintercept...ast-prudential/

 

:( -_-


"A small elephant is not a rabbit."


#60 jamesjazzguitar

jamesjazzguitar

    There is nothing as bad as something not so bad

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,427 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 23 June 2017 - 11:59 AM

A progressive or liberal Democrat of the Pelosi/Warren/Sanders type would not even have made it past the primaries in SC and GA.  And probably not in KS or MT either.

 

The fact that Parnell and Ossoff came as close as they did is significant.  NO Dem was supposed to even be in contention in either election.

Parnell came within 3% (better than Ossoff) of defeating the Republican in SC.  Mulvaney carried the district by 20% in last general election.

 

The misunderstanding is that the Dems and the media tried to present the special elections as being something they weren't.  A good opportunity for the Dems to replace Republicans.  These are rock-ribbed conservative, Republican bastions.

 

The real test will be in 2018 when there is a regular election scheduled.

But the really, really big test will be in 2020 when the voter turn-out will be really big.

 

It appears you believe it was a mistake for Dems outside of that GA district to outspend the GOP by over a 5 to 1 ratio in an election where the odds of winning were slim to none.    

 

To me this Dem party leadership decision is another example of Dem arrogance as it relates to all-things-Trump.   E.g. Clinton NOT visiting Wisconsin because her team believe that was in the bag.    

 

Trump is clearly bringing down the GOP and there is much upside for the Dems as it relates to the 2018 mid-terms (but mostly in the House).    But as we have discussed it will still be difficult for the Dems to gain the necessary House seat.   Many victory margins will be razor thin.      The Dems can't afford many more strategic blunders if they wish to prevail regardless of how poorly Trump is viewed or how low his approval ratings go leading up to November 2018.

 

Losing by less in 2018 than they did in previous elections is NOT prevailing.     (something you know but I'm not sure the Dem leadership does after those silly statements by Pelosi).

 

(PS: as for voter turnout;   Dems should be able to get the best voter turnout in a midterm in election history,  if they don't that is another example of Dem party leadership failure).






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users