PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
I agree that the GOP doesn't play by the same rules, but the Democrats seem intent on still pretending that they do. They define themselves by worry about what the GOP is going to say about them. They're terrified of labels: hypocrite, partisan, socialist. Then when they sprint to the center on every issue ... they still get called those things anyway.The Left is going to lose no matter what. The two sides aren't even playing the same game anymore. It's obvious the GOP will do whatever it takes to claim, and hold on to power.
Is it even feasible to believe that the Democrats would stand by their own Roy Moore? Please do not say Bill Clinton. He didn't molest little girls. He was just a perv (and you could make the point that Bill probably wouldn't have survived in today's climate with the #MeToo ).
We are seeing the Dems purge out their own creeps, and on the other side? Aside from one or two senators (who are quitting), there's been silence. And silence equals acceptance.
If Bernie is still alive and kicking in 2020, throw him out there. Warren too. The Dems will still fight though, and it'll give the GOP the WH again because they fall in line.
What's amazing with all these accusations, stories, issues coming up.....Obama hasn't had one single stain on him. While he may not have been everything the Left wanted, he was by far and away the most professional, and presidential of any politician of my lifetime. Dude had integrity.
Bill Clinton is not Roy Moore, but he has been accused of rape, and many Democrats don't "count" that because it was beneficial to Republicans so it must be false. I don't think Clinton being "better" than Roy Moore is any credit to him. Bill Clinton fucking sucks. He's way more than just a horny guy, but somehow that's what we've allowed ourselves to pretend for a long time.
They aren't going to purge their own creeps, which means you have to beat them in an election. You need to drive people out to the polls by offering them something. You can do that in a lot of places without compromising your morals ... so long as your morals aren't beholden to corporate donors.
Obama does seem to have a lot of personal integrity, but his foreign policy is a rather massive stain. I don't consider any president of ours to this point to have been any sort of moral beacon.
I agree that Sanders, Clinton, and Biden should be nowhere near 2020, and I tend to agree about Warren as well though I would hate it less than those three. Sanders is far too old.Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren should be nowhere near the Democratic nomination for president in 2020.
Get someone young and inspiring.
But I do have to agree that the Republicans, as chaotic as they seem to be, do the politics significantly better than the Democrats.
They have the same amount of infighting, but when it's time for vote, they vote for the guy with the R no matter what.
They're also shedding young members a faster than they can create new ones, but on the short term it's working for them, and they have the ability to create enough long term pain right now to make it last a generation.
Cory Booker is establishment, it's a very fair criticism.Who in the D party can rise up? Thoughts were Booker, and the two brothers from TX....but they've already been called ESTABLISHMENT!!! by the progressive side.
Keith Ellision maybe?
The real scary part of all of this is that Trump is filling our courts with Alt Right and Extremists. Judges who aren't even remotely qualified to hold these positions, and they'll be in there for life.
We are going to feel the pain for a long time, and I'm afraid no young whippersnapper from the Left can fix it.
I think Biden would be great, if his age wouldn't be such a problem. He's a straight shooter without being a complete moron. I think Joe would continue Obama's progress
Biden is a creep with women, his time has passed.
Ellison won't ever get the support from the DNC.
Perhaps.Preferably someone we aren't thinking of yet.
She may be the right combination of young enough and palatable enough to both the left and the Democrats. I don't love her, but she probably makes the most sense of the current names in the picture.I think that tweet today just got Gillibrand into the 2020 race.
My comments above sort of address this, but I think the communication problem is one of lacking convictions, not one of messaging. They can't communicate them properly because they don't really want to do them. Sanders had a very easy time talking about them because his donor base was individuals. Most Dems are trying to compete for the big donors and the economic policies that would most directly help the people they'd drive out to the polls are not palatable to the donors. The Dems' economics end up being only slightly to the left of the Republicans at the end of the day. They have a way better track record on social policy, but that doesn't drive enough people out to beat back against the very reliable voting base the GOP has developed.I don't think you're BMP, but I think your assessment that there's overwhelming support for leftist economic policy is a bit out of touch.
There are many that will support concepts of single payer, but once you label it single payer or "leftist economics" they'll run. This is why the Democratic party won't embrace it full on. They have an uphill battle on their hands as to how to communicate these policies. So far the progressive side doesn't really have anyone that can, how do you expect the Democratic party to do so?
They'll learn to communicate the policies once they actually embrace them.