Jump to content

Can the dem party be an opposition party?


Zaro

Recommended Posts

 

Of course we can bring ballot box cheaters to court, IF there are witnesses and enough proof ... A mighty tall order. Machines can be replaced with more tamper resistant ones ... If there is the political will. And even now, vote tampering can't be that widespread. Hillary lead Trump by nearly three million votes nationally. Of course, a small amount of cheating can flip elections. But there will always be cheating on vote counts. There is no way to end it entirely.

 

Better to start fixing the things we can fix, starting when next we get back the majority somewhere. Until then, Democrats are hamstrung to pass any federal legislation. All we can do is protest and obstruct. Once we get back some power, it's better to begin by fixing the things we can fix, unambiguously.

 

 

Here are some suggestions.

 

https://www.thenation.com/article/throw-sand-in-the-gears-of-everything/

With the current structure in place, I don't believe we can get decent people back in power. Further, there are very few things we can fix, that Trump and his cronies won't break again by executive order, or by GOP congressional order, or by GOP court order.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 233
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So in your view all is lost? If so, I can't join you. I feel things can begin to turn in a little as four years.

Things can turn. All is not lost; rather I suggest we work first to fix the broken election system. First call out the election fraud and make a big point of it. Second take the crooks to court. Gather the evidence showing exactly how they stole election after election. Bring the evidence to the public, convict them in the court of public opinion first so the GOP judges have little choice. Find a way to get the word out, the election was fraudulent and Trump does not belong in the White house, he belongs in jail.

 

What we are talking about is priorities. From my perspective, with the GOP controlling the entire government with no checks and balances we have some work to do just to minimize the damage. Yes, lots of people are going to die. If we first restore the right to vote, then we can restore decency in government. I don't think you can do it the other way around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Campaign finance reform needs to happen asap.

 

I donated what I was told was the maximum to Bernie Sanders during the primary: $2700.

 

However, my congresswoman's ex-husband, S. Donald Sussman, donated $36 million to Hillary and the DNC, in general.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/superpac-donors-2016/

 

:huh: 36 million? Wtf? Can anyone seriously contend that our government is NOT bought and paid for?

 

It doesn't matter that I agree with Mr. Sussman on most issues. No one should be able to donate $36 million dollars to a political campaign/party. No one. My vote should count EXACTLY the same as his....no more, but certainly no less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you think Mr. Sussman should be able to donate $36 million when I can only donate $2700? :huh:

 

The legal maximum a person can donate to a presidential candidate is $2,700 per election.

 

You maxed out. So, presumably, did Sussman.

 

I'd love to see the Citizen's United enabled super-pac spending get reigned in.

 

None of this takes the onus off your decision not to vote. Nor does it validate a claim that Sussman's vote was worth more than yours.

 

You threw your vote away when you knew a Trump victory was a real threat. That's not on Sussman, it is on YOU.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The legal maximum a person can donate to a presidential candidate is $2,700 per election.

 

You maxed out. So, presumably, did Sussman.

 

I'd love to see the Citizen's United enabled super-pac spending get reigned in.

 

None of this takes the onus off your decision not to vote. Nor does it validate a claim that Sussman's vote was worth more than yours.

 

You threw your vote away when you knew a Trump victory was a real threat. That's not on Sussman, it is on YOU.

 

Bill

 

We've heard this dozens of times already. Enough is enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We've heard this dozens of times already. Enough is enough.

 

It is galling to hear people complain they were robbed of their votes by the Russians or by Democratic donors when the reality is they made a catastrophically bad decision not to vote and to sit out the election that helped elect Donald Trump.

 

Enough really is enough.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is galling to hear people complain they were robbed of their votes by the Russians or by Democratic donors when the reality is they made a catastrophically bad decision not to vote and to sit out the election that helped elect Donald Trump.

 

Enough really is enough.

 

Bill

 

Then please try to think of ways to express that notion without making it seem like a repetitious, personal attack.

 

Rules for LO

Welcome to Liberals only forum

 

No conservatives allowed

Post respectfully, personal attacks will not be tolerated

No more than five new threads a day

No trash talking about members and their kids

No porn, or links to porn

No gore pictures

No cursing in thread titles

No, 'outing' of members or their families; names, addresses, phone numbers, SSNs, etc.

No linking to other political forums

No solicitations

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I'm (falsely) called a liar we don't see:

 

Post respectfully, personal attacks will not be tolerated

 

People can't make false claims that "they were robbed" of their votes when the truth is they made a choice not to vote. It wasn't the Russians. It wasn't wealthy donors.

 

Let's live in reality. It is not a personal attack to point out the truth.

 

It is a personal attack to falsely accuse someone of being a liar.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I'm (falsely) called a liar we don't see:

 

Post respectfully, personal attacks will not be tolerated

 

People can't make false claims that "they were robbed" of their votes when the truth is they made a choice not to vote. It wasn't the Russians. It wasn't wealthy donors.

 

Let's live in reality. It is not a personal attack to point out the truth.

 

It is a personal attack to falsely accuse someone of being a liar.

 

Bill

 

This is the last warning pending a one week suspension:

 

You are in violation of the rules too often.

 

You carry personal vendettas too far.

 

You can't let any slight by without bringing it up forever.

 

You are in violation of rule number 2 much too often. "Post respectfully, personal attacks will not be tolerated"

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that I think is clear -- and that I warned about even before the end of the primaries, is the deep division in the Democratic party, even between progressives and liberals, between those who are still willing to support centrist policies and more corporate overtones, and those who are no longer willing to accept those in a candidate. The Clinton - Sanders primary did not cause the fractures on the left; it highlighted them. Faced with a generation's worth of rightwards creep, a growing number of people wish to break with centrist policies.

 

 

In short, the Democratic Party leadership needs to pull its collective head out of its collective ass and veer left sharply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While we often agree, I am going to disagree here. I don't believe the election was open fair and honest. There are a great many factors; from illegal gerrymandering to voter suppression, to Russia, to Comey, to dark money to massive bribery, to vote counting boxes obviously miscounting the ballots. (There is a documentary I heard about on Thom Hartmann where they discuss the fraud in Wisconsin and Michigan where votes for Hillary weren't counted. The machines were programmed not to count the filled in Dot next to Hillary's name so the recount simply didn't count them again. This by itself was enough to flip the election.)

 

Further most people oppose Trump and would not have voted for him. The election was a fraud, no way around it. With all the cheating, any one should have been enough to redo the election. The will of the American people should not be determined by fraud.

 

Hillary's campaign was not perfect, nor is any campaign. You may remember be asking if she would reach out on specific issues. I believe she did change some of her positions as reflected in the campaign platform, but she didn't campaign on those items. Regardless of the quality of her campaign the election did not reflect the will of the American people. I have a hard time believing the American people are so stupid as to elect Trump. Some people will fall for the propaganda, but to claim we need to get rid of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Public Schools, health care, funnel more money to the wealthy, pillage our nation for the benefit of the few will not convince enough people to win an election.

In Polls both before and after the election Hillary won. The only time Hillary didn't win was when the republicans were responsible for counting the ballots.

 

All the things mentioned need to happen;

 

Citizens United overturned

Voting machines programming need to be hack proof and tamper proof, IMO Fed Level

Paper ballots and voting machines needs to be counted by impartial people or organizations.

Gerrymandering need to be dealt with,

Voter suppression, intimidation, etc

etc

 

The DNC and the RNC will be no help in such matters, in fact will probably hinder any such efforts.

Where does that leave us, probably at only the state and local levels will any progress be made in the beginning

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that I think is clear -- and that I warned about even before the end of the primaries, is the deep division in the Democratic party, even between progressives and liberals, between those who are still willing to support centrist policies and more corporate overtones, and those who are no longer willing to accept those in a candidate. The Clinton - Sanders primary did not cause the fractures on the left; it highlighted them. Faced with a generation's worth of rightwards creep, a growing number of people wish to break with centrist policies.

 

 

In short, the Democratic Party leadership needs to pull its collective head out of its collective ass and veer left sharply.

 

Liberals are progressives. This was a split between liberals and populist extremists on the left who preferred a Trump victory as a way to bring on their idea of a glorious Socialist revolution. It is a failed strategy and a failed collectivist ideology. A regressive movement.

 

Progressive liberals need to beware of all threats to liberalism, including those from a nefarious left. Never (ever) should we embrace those who enabled Trump.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Liberals are progressives. This was a split between liberals and populist extremists on the left who preferred a Trump victory as a way to bring on their idea of a glorious Socialist revolution. It is a failed strategy and a failed collectivist ideology. A regressive movement.

 

Progressive liberals need to beware of all threats to liberalism, including those from a nefarious left. Never (ever) should we embrace those who enabled Trump.

 

Bill

 

No Bill

 

The failure was and is Clinton, your blaming everyone except the one who failed.

She owns it

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Liberals are progressives. This was a split between liberals and populist extremists on the left who preferred a Trump victory as a way to bring on their idea of a glorious Socialist revolution. It is a failed strategy and a failed collectivist ideology. A regressive movement.

 

Progressive liberals need to beware of all threats to liberalism, including those from a nefarious left. Never (ever) should we embrace those who enabled Trump.

 

Bill

This exists in your head only. You have apparently no understanding of anything left of you.. Please come back to reality so we can actually make progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This exists in your head only. You have apparently no understanding of anything left of you.. Please come back to reality so we can actually make progress.

 

You claimed you were a "liberal" days ago, but in post 213 above you suggest liberals are not progressives.

 

You can't have it both ways.

 

The far left doesn't offer progress. It offers a failed ideology and divisionism.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is galling to hear people complain they were robbed of their votes by the Russians or by Democratic donors when the reality is they made a catastrophically bad decision not to vote and to sit out the election that helped elect Donald Trump.

I didn't "help elect Donald Trump." I didn't work on his campaign and I didn't vote for him. I didn't "sit out the election." I voted. I only left the presidential section blank. I did that not because I didn't want to vote for president, but because every candidate on the ballot was unacceptable to me.

 

In fact, if I had it to do all over again (knowing what I know now), I STILL would never have voted for HRC. Four years of Trump is going to suck - on that we both agree. However I firmly believe that EIGHT years of HRC would have sucked, too. It was a lose/lose proposition to me, therefore I voted "none of the above."

 

I am working with many other liberals and progressives in my area to transform left of center politics to accomplish two things:

 

1.) Hold elected official accountable for their promises, votes, and actions while in office.

2.) Elect officials who are devoted to working for and helping the working class (who have been thrown under the bus for far too long).

 

The Democratic Party (as well as left of center politics, in general) needs drastic change, not more of the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps what we liberals need to do is to decide who we want to run and generate the buzz ourselves early and loudly. Then maybe party leadership will come behind OUR chosen one instead of anointing someone they pick, no matter how unpopular with the voters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Democrats got the nominee we wanted. You know, the one who had millions more votes.

 

For outsiders to the party to think they can subvert the will of the people by being loud is an example of the anti-democratic impulses of the left that need to be resisted.

 

The fringe is not the majority.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Democrats got the nominee we wanted.

Some of you did. However there were quite a few Democrats who didn't want her. There were still others who voted for her simply because she was a better option than Trump. However, in the end, it wasn't enough to accumulate 270 electoral votes.

 

For outsiders to the party to think they can subvert the will of the people by being loud is an example of the anti-democratic impulses of the left that need to be resisted.

 

The fringe is not the majority.

 

Bill

Being "loud" when we feel that our government needs to listen is "anti-democratic?" :huh: News to me. As for me being an "outsider," my presidential voting history is as follows:

 

Carter

Carter

Mondale

Dukakis

Clinton

Clinton (didn't feel good about it, but I voted for him a 2nd time)

Gore (didn't feel good about it, but I voted for him - withdrew from the Democratic Party a week after the SCOTUS decision)

Kerry (aargh, wtf? - voted for him, though....after all, anybody but Bush!)

Obama (finally! someone who is going to pay attention to the issues I care about)

Obama (not as enthusiastic, but I voted for him a second time)

2016- Voted "none of the above"

 

While I'm definitely not a Democrat, I'm hardly an "outsider." Being an advocate for the hard-working middle class never used to be consider "fringe." The Democratic party has morphed into something I don't even recognize anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being "loud" is anti-democratic when activists who are in the minority attempt to drown out and destroy the self-expression of the majority .

 

Booing a civil rights hero at the convention is something worthy of Trumpists. Making death threats and engaging in a near-riot (as in Nevada) is unconscionable and anti-democratic.

 

Advocating for the hard-working middle class isn't "fringe" (although there is an irony when a leader who never held a regular job tries to position himself as a "working class hero"), but advocating for a socialist revolution is fringe.

 

The goals of Democratic Socialism are way outside the American political mainstream and are not consistent with Liberalism.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being "loud" is anti-democratic when activists who are in the minority attempt to drown out and destroy the self-expression of the majority .

 

Booing a civil rights hero at the convention is something worthy of Trumpists. Making death threats and engaging in a near-riot (as in Nevada) is unconscionable and anti-democratic.

 

Advocating for the hard-working middle class isn't "fringe" (although there is an irony when a leader who never held a regular job tries to position himself as a "working class hero"), but advocating for a socialist revolution is fringe.

 

The goals of Democratic Socialism are way outside the American political mainstream and are not consistent with Liberalism.

 

Bill

 

In what world do you consider you consider yourself the Majority?

 

Being one of the 25% isn't a majority, you might give that a little thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...