advertisement


The Future Of The Democratic Party.

Hook said:
Which of Harris's policy positions do you find most sociopathic? Is it healthcare for all, economic justice, raising teacher pay, combating the climate crisis, criminal justice reform, action on guns, fair and just immigration, gender equality, LGBTQ equality, debt free college, or racial justice? Or is it her refusal to accept corporate PAC money?
Click to expand...

it's the fact that, like obama, she says she supports all sorts of progressive things, but i don't believe that any of it is sincere in terms of her actually taking forceful action if president. she's also been very inconsistent and chooses words cunningly to avoid getting "caught".
 
Obama got the ACA passed, then lost the House, and subsequently the Senate. If he were more forcefully progressive, I’m sure the losses would have been greater. That’s the the state of politics in the US.
 
It's all in the record and all of it is online. There's nothing terrible in that record, but it doesn't have a bonafide progressive flavor either. And she's even more carefully managed, parsed and guarded now.

Progressives know the label she wears is a facade, and so the only dem faction buying into it are the loyal Team Democrat mainstreamers ... the same group who would gladly pull the lever for a Biden.

I mean you've got a guy upstream posting 'justice' three times in the same list that includes 'healthcare for all' and 'combating climate change' while she dumped out of a climate debate before jumping back in, throwing Sanders and Medicare for all under the bus she once rode in, and all while the pinned justice tag is laughably debunked after 10 minutes with her record as a prosecutor.

Candidates like Harris are why the democratic party is a failure to anyone beyond brand loyalists and Twitter addicts.
 
John said:
ACA a republican policy? You’ve got to be kidding.
Click to expand...

The ACA was based on what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts.

Republicans only began hating it after it was passed nationally as "Obamacare".
 
Hook said:
The ACA was based on what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts.

Republicans only began hating it after it was passed nationally as "Obamacare".
Click to expand...

Back in 2009 and 2010, Democrats controlled the White House and the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rammed Obamacare through without a single Republican vote.

The Washington Post said of the Obamacare fight at the time “It has inflamed the partisanship that Obama pledged to tame when he campaigned for the White House and has limited Congress’s ability to pass any other major legislation.”

In December 2009, the U.S. Senate voted 60 to 39 for Obamacare. The Washington Post reported “The Senate bill passed without a single GOP vote.”

In March 2010, the U.S. House voted 219 to 212 for Obamacare. 34 House Democrats and all of the House Republicans voted against Obamacare. The NO votes were the only bipartisan votes.

President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) on March 23, 2010.
 
John said:
Back in 2009 and 2010, Democrats controlled the White House and the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rammed Obamacare through without a single Republican vote.

The Washington Post said of the Obamacare fight at the time “It has inflamed the partisanship that Obama pledged to tame when he campaigned for the White House and has limited Congress’s ability to pass any other major legislation.”

In December 2009, the U.S. Senate voted 60 to 39 for Obamacare. The Washington Post reported “The Senate bill passed without a single GOP vote.”

In March 2010, the U.S. House voted 219 to 212 for Obamacare. 34 House Democrats and all of the House Republicans voted against Obamacare. The NO votes were the only bipartisan votes.

President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) on March 23, 2010.
Click to expand...

I understand the history, and was simply pointing out the basis for vuk's comment.
 
The only way I'm aware of that a single person in the USA can have 100% free healthcare via the ACA is expanded Medicaid, and that's if they have less than 17k USD a year in total income. And it's not available in many Red states because the states opted out.
 
At the rate the uber progressive prosecutor is shooting herself in the feet (single digit approval), she's about to become a bit player in the DNC $hitshow unless she quickly puts together a cartload of Hopium for the climate debate she cancelled for fundraising but has decided now to attend.
 
I know that, but you'd be surprised how many mainstream democrats refer to her as a progressive, probably from her cheat sheet.

I'd say also that courting progressives was why she glommed onto Medicare for All before she ditched it for insurance companies.
 
So ... someone who cancelled a televised climate change debate with her rivals now has a $10 Trillion dollar plan for the USA to be greenhouse gas emission free by 2045. And it will work! Because prosecutorial.

90


https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-09-03/kamala-harris-climate-change
 
@Marky-Mark

as i sad before, she is probably a sociopath or just really comfortable with big lies for other personality reasons. i am hoping she and biden are done before the end of the year. without the massive bias and free promotion form MSNBC and the rest, they would be done already.
 
Bernie Sanders criticising the military industrial complex and military spending, demanding that some of the insane 'defence' budget be put to use to help the American people instead, in 1992!


 
@maxflinn

i don't think he would be prepared to say anything that risky during the current campaign, but it sure needs saying. the USA is mostly in a state of nation-centric delusion (that is pretty much identical to the psychology of racism) leading people to believe they are so much better than the rest of the world that extreme authoritarian measures like spending half your money on the military are necessary to protect against being raped by unwashed foreigners -- whatever symbolic form of that works for you (it even worked for elizabeth warren when she voted for the recent budget increase under trump).

in the truest spirit of imperialism, it actually goes well beyond. here is a diagram illustrating military bases around the world:

backpage-11601.jpg


source: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/us-military-bases-around-the-world-119321

Despite recently closing hundreds of bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States still maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad—from giant “Little Americas” to small radar facilities. Britain, France and Russia, by contrast, have about 30 foreign bases combined.


are we allowed to classify this as some type of imperialism? is normalizing trump worse than normalizing 800 military bases?
 
funny how appalled people are by every little silly thing trump does, but the above is not worth get worked up about or commenting on.
 
I suppose it depends on how concerned you are about who is the dominant global military power. I'd rather it was a close ally than another state.
 
Seeker_UK said:
I suppose it depends on how concerned you are about who is the dominant global military power. I'd rather it was a close ally than another state.
Click to expand...

it also depends if you are concerned about having a global/imperial military power in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top