TheCid

Future of Democratic Party?

660 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, TheCid said:

As I have said many times before, Pelosi is one of the best things the GOPers  have going for them in 80% of districts, maybe more.

More critical nationally is the Trump budget which dramatically reduces or eliminates Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, health care, public education, etc.  This is what the Dems, including progressives, need to focus upon.  Add in the enormous waste in the new military budget and the DOA Trump infrastructure plan.

Immigration, Medicare for All, Free College, $15 min. wage will drive the voters right back to the GOPers again.

We view this the same from a political POV.    Progressive that believe Pelosi type Dems are NOT liberal \ progressive enough are likely to drive voters right back to the GOP. 

Note that the latest generic poll has the GOP leading.    I believe this is because of their misguided and mismanaged approach to immigration reform.    The Trump budget should push the generic poll back in favor of the Dems and of course there is still a lot of time for either party to mess thing up (but the primaries are not that far off). 

For the 5 CA GOP House seats that are 'in play' the Dems are starting to lose ground.   While Clinton beat Trump is 3 or these it was by a small margin and Clinton is viewed as a moderate \ establishment Dem in these districts.    A left of Pelosi Dem will lose big time against any GOP candidate that isn't a Freedom Caucus type (and the GOP is wise enough to not run that type in these 'toss up' districts). 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

We view this the same from a political POV.    Progressive that believe Pelosi type Dems are NOT liberal \ progressive enough are likely to drive voters right back to the GOP. 

Note that the latest generic poll has the GOP leading.    I believe this is because of their misguided and mismanaged approach to immigration reform.    The Trump budget should push the generic poll back in favor of the Dems and of course there is still a lot of time for either party to mess thing up (but the primaries are not that far off). 

For the 5 CA GOP House seats that are 'in play' the Dems are starting to lose ground.   While Clinton beat Trump is 3 or these it was by a small margin and Clinton is viewed as a moderate \ establishment Dem in these districts.    A left of Pelosi Dem will lose big time against any GOP candidate that isn't a Freedom Caucus type (and the GOP is wise enough to not run that type in these 'toss up' districts). 

 

 

It depends on how you're viewing "left." From social viewpoints Pelosi is very far left but from an economic one she isn't that far left at all. Bernie was much farther economically left and had a large following.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

It depends on how you're viewing "left." From social viewpoints Pelosi is very far left but from an economic one she isn't that far left at all. Bernie was much farther economically left and had a large following.

I was mostly talking about those that are far left on illegal immigration.   E.g. the current debate in the Senate.  

Some members of the Dem party are against anything that will target sanctuary cities or states.    The current GOP plans allows for 'dreamers' to received permanent legal status,  those that qualify as 'dreamers' but didn't file under DACA,  and for them to legalize their parents.    

Once all of these illegal immigrants are legalized why is there a need for sanctuary cities and states?   The answer is obvious;  Those Dems want TOTAL amnesty.   They don't wish for ANY deportations or sanctions against illegal immigrants.     While the overall Dem party says it is all about protecting the 'dreamers' that is a myth.   They want it all as it relates to immigration reform,  and that is insane given their total lack of power in DC.    

It appears there will be NO immigration deal because the Dems are willing to put the dreamers under the bus in their lame and misguided attempt for total amnesty,  no additional border security, no E-verify,  i.e. nothing that makes it more difficult for an illegal immigrant to get here, get a job and stay here.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:unsure:

"In moves celebrated by progressives as further evidence that grassroots pressure on the Democratic Party to ditch corporate cash is having an impact, two senators—Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.)—pledged on Tuesday to no longer accept corporate PAC donations.

"Our movement has shown that you can't expect to be a leader of the Democratic Party if you're going to keep taking money from Wall Street banks and large corporations."
—Justice Democrats

 

In making this pledge, Gillibrand and Booker joined a small group of their Senate colleagues—Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Maria Cantwell (D-Was.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who have already sworn off corporate PAC money..........

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/02/14/recognizing-populist-demand-gillibrand-and-booker-swear-corporate-cash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr6666 said:

grassroots pressure on the Democratic Party to ditch corporate cash is having an impact, t

I wonder if the Dems do this in any states that are not blue states. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonna take a dog to eat a dog, I see Hardball's Chris Matthews is troting out Joe Kennedy III, a big

F-That, we don't need more of the same ol' same ol' crap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, cigarjoe said:

Gonna take a dog to eat a dog, I see Hardball's Chris Matthews is troting out Joe Kennedy III, a big

F-That, we don't need more of the same ol' same ol' crap. 

As a possible Presidential candidate?     Why not go with Chelsea if that is the direction one wishes to go in.

 

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mr6666 said:

Gillibrand and Booker ....... sworn off corporate PAC money

Too late for Booker. Progressives don't believe him anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2018 at 3:07 PM, mr6666 said:

:unsure:

"In moves celebrated by progressives as further evidence that grassroots pressure on the Democratic Party to ditch corporate cash is having an impact, two senators—Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.)—pledged on Tuesday to no longer accept corporate PAC donations.

"Our movement has shown that you can't expect to be a leader of the Democratic Party if you're going to keep taking money from Wall Street banks and large corporations."
—Justice Democrats

 

In making this pledge, Gillibrand and Booker joined a small group of their Senate colleagues—Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Maria Cantwell (D-Was.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who have already sworn off corporate PAC money..........

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/02/14/recognizing-populist-demand-gillibrand-and-booker-swear-corporate-cash

While I am not a fan of any PAC's, not sure what the real implications are of "swearing off" them.   Will this make them further beholding to the the non-corporate PAC's and organizations from which they do accept money?  Will this enable their opponents to paint them as ultra-liberal, left wing types with ties to liberal special interest groups?

As James noted, it is easy to do this is hard blue states, but what about the red states with Dem senators or the purple states with Dem senators.  They will need all the help they can get.

Maybe the best method is to take money from everybody, promise them nothing and make it very public. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not opposed to the Affordable Care Act, but I wonder if it may be the biggest mistake politically that the Democrats have made this century or for decades.

The net result to a great extent was to enable the Republicans to take over a majority of state governments, the US House, the US Senate, the White House and the US Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us