DNC got a new chair

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ElectricFetus, Feb 25, 2017.

  1. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    and the winner is Tom Perez, a Obama cabinet member who and relatively progressive clintonite. He is for $15 wage increase but also was for TPP. The final vote came close with 235 votes for Perez and 200 for
    Keith Ellison, the bernicrat candidate. I personally met Keith Ellision at a DFL function and found him kind of lacking, so it was not a total lose. Perez in the first few minutes of his victory sensing that the party was about to split put Keith Ellison as his deputy chairman, a smart move.

    The question though is will his strategizing actually lead to wins in 2018 and 2020?
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2017
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    I think it worked out well. I too found Ellison lacking.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I personally fear that Perez will be a bit too conformist when it comes to big-party players... I just hope the DNC isn't gearing up to hand 2020 to Trump all over again...
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
  8. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    And that's exactly what happened. It was theirs to lose.
     
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    And once again the frame is bolted together: horrible stuff done by Republicans is the fault of the Democrats, for not opposing them in the right way or with sufficient vigor.

    The rise of Donald Trump, and his takeover of the Republican Party, and his electoral college win of the Presidency, is in no way the fault of the Democratic Party or anyone in it.

    Republicans are not children, pets, or legal incompetents - not even the Trump voters. They voted for Trump with their eyes open, with open access to the widest range of information anyone on earth has ever had.

    Your neighbors are the problem here, not the DNC leadership.

    Edit in: one take from the libertarian left, as of Friday before the vote:
    http://driftglass.blogspot.com
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2017
  10. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    HAha, aaah laugh of the day. It is Hillary Clinton's fault first and foremost, and she is a member of the democratic party, next it is the regressive lefts fault and most of them atleast voted for her. True the anti-establishment wave that is taking the developed world is not the democrat's fault but it is the democrat's fault for fielding the most establishment candidate during such a time.

    And what is the solution? The best solution I can figure is to give them a better candidate to vote for next time, what is your solution?
     
  11. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    Nope. Though the problems are many, I think at the heart of the issue is a split between young progressives and establishment Democrats. The former wants all or nothing.
     
  12. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    And just what are those "many" problems? Please be explicit and have some evidence to back it up. There are two wings if the Democratic Party, the more traditional party and the young bloods. But neither wing is stupid, and neither wing wants Republican control of government. I don't think the divides are many or deep as evidenced by the appointment of Ellison to the number 2 position. Were it not for 70,000 votes in a few key states a Democrat would be sitting in the White House today.

    The Democratic Party's problem is that for too long it has neglected state and local elections in many key states. They allowed Republicans to gerrymander. They didn't fight it, and they need to fight it.

    In a few years we will be going through another redistricting exercise. Democrats need to be present and active during congressional redistricting. That's why Republicans can get a minority of the popular vote and still win. Democrats need to be bold in the defense of our democracy, because Republicans sure the hell won't be.
     
  13. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    Well, Joe, the Democratic Party speaks to power,not the people...not even to its own constituency. That's the biggest fail that will keep it from gaining any ground. Yes, they are paving the way for a second Trump presidential term.
     
  14. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    I do think Bowser hit the nail on the divide between the progressives and moderates at least, but the fact so many were willing to vote for Hillary (I included) is proof that most, but not all, not enough, would be willing to compromise even for someone they feel is barely any better than a standard republican, like Hillary, verse the killing joke that is Trump. I think that even if next time an establishment democrat were to win the primary, but not have as much baggage as hillary, that democrats chances against trump will be better, assuming things don't improve economically under Trump for the working class, which is not very likely.

    It all comes down to if the economy improve for the working class or not, if not they will vote for something new, always something new. To win we must present a candidate that is populist and that the public believes will implement populist polices that improve their economic condition, and we can only hold and gain greater control if we do just that. Obama's failure to get more out of full democrat control of 2009-2012 was due to his moderatism and the corporatist establishment democrats, the best being Obamacare and not universal healthcare. Cause the democrats to lose and lose then after, he only staying as president because Romney was no better choice for people and presented no greater change.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2017
  15. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    Might be difficult for the Democratic Party since they rely so heavily on the minority vote. Also, can they avoid their own corruption in the future? Will they push a corporate sack of trash rather than a real popular candidate?

    I have difficulty believing they can give us a real populist candidate, being that the populist is usually contrary to the establishment agenda.
     
  16. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    and, so? are you implying we would lose the minority vote?

    Parties in power eventually fall from corruption or the products of that corruption, it is inevitable. The Bush years is a good example as the republicans enjoyed total control through most of it, deregulating to their corpistist overlords content, resulting a near economic collapse that saw them kicked out of power completely with a black president no less.

    If they do the chances of winning in 2020 won't be good.

    Well last time it was McGovern and that was too much for people so they went with Nixon instead, bad move.
     
  17. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    I'm not a part of the working class. So I might be a little out of touch with the working class even though I spent a number of years as a member of the working class. I think the working class feels they have been screwed by the "establishment". And they have, in more ways than they realize, and that's part of the problem. Their pension plans and healthcare insurance went the way of the dodo bird. Instead of pensions they were given 401Ks and IRAs for which they were ill prepared to manage and as a result millions of them lost their retirement savings during the Great Recession. They sold their retirement investments at exactly the wrong time and in so doing lost more than half of their retirement savings. Now they have seen the recovery, and they aren't feeling all that recovered. They haven't seen their retirement savings recover, because they sold at the bottom and some of them has stayed out or went to "safer" investments. And now when interest rates have begun to rise, they will feel abused again, because they will discover their "safer" investments aren't as safe as they thought they were.

    They lost their retirement savings, and they lost their healthcare, instead of companies picking up all of the healthcare costs as was the case, costs were shifted to employees. Eventually, retiree healthcare was taken away too. Before, back in the good old days they had a company provided pension and retiree healthcare. Now they have none of that.

    So now we have a large number of people who are pretty frustrated and rightly so. But giving the keys to your home to the robbers is probably not a good strategy to fix it, and tearing down the house is probably not a good option either. I agree with your assessment of Democrats. I think someone with less baggage will be a better candidate for Democrats. The next presidential election cycle Trump will be carrying his own baggage and lots of it. The man is only one month into his presidency and congressmen are talking impeachment, and he is mired in FBI and congressional investigations and suffering the worst job approval ratings in history. History indicates it's all down hill from here for Trump. Trump may not be POTUS next election cycle if his first month in office is any indication of the future.

    Democrats need to latch on the these middle class issues and they need a charismatic leader. Trump inherited a good economy. We will soon see what he does with it. Market are up based on the belief congressional deadlock is over and Trump's promises of a massive fiscal stimulus. e.g. infrastructure spending, tax cuts, defense spending, etc. Trump has promised trillions in additional federal spending. If he gets that spending it will be like throwing gasoline on a fire - assuming his threatened trade wars never materialize. But that probably won't help the middle class. In fact it could make thing much worse. With unemployment this low, it could ignite a round of double digit inflation and high interest rates. Trump will be priming the economy with fuel and the Federal Reserve will be laying on the brakes to mitigate the inflation Trump's policies will cause, and that could cause Trump to replace Yellen at the Fed. I don't think Trump will make the middle class feel better.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2017
    ElectricFetus likes this.
  18. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    That might be all they get. Even so, they lost a percentage in the last election.

    Yet where was any real change?

    Ah, yes..."Change"

    I think they are beyond helping themselves and need a kick in the ass by their constituents.

    Interesting. I'm gonna let that stand.
     
  19. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    I think the above funny. Trump has inherited the role of David, the Left being the giant. The Democrats and Media are making him a martyr.
     
  20. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    A tiny precentage because we run such a horrible candidate.

    Well aside for us recovering, not much, better than nothing.

    Hey it pissed off a lot of conservatives to no end, the birthers, etc, all this helped lead to the rise of the tea party and alt-right and the modern monstrosity that is the republican party.

    Well I know from a regional level the democrats have been kicking the establishment pretty hard, again if they don't shape up they will lose 2020.

    You think Bernie would have been "too much" against Trump no less? In fact Trump would have been the perfect candidate against Bernie. Also 2016 is radically different politically from 1972.
     
  21. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    LOL....I think you have it wrong. Trump is no David. Trump isn't a martyr, and the American left is no giant. Trump has never been nor will he ever be a martyr. He loves his own skin too much to waste it on martyrdom. Trump has never demonstrated any ability to self sacrifice anything as evidenced by his charitable foundation. Self sacrifice just isn't his shtick.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2017
  22. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    As long as you realize there is no such thing as a candidate the Rep propagandists can't slander, and Trump's name recognition is going to be a great advantage.

    And get a handle on who "they" is. Trump is an ideal candidate for the Republican voting base - which includes most of the "independents". You can't find a better, for them.

    So a better candidate for the people whose votes you can get, and quit treating people like they're stupid. They see through you.

    And - in my opinion - concentrate on the Senate and the Governors. Harder to gerrymander. Electoral fraud and manipulation has decided three of the past five Presidential elections. Gerrymandering, on top of fraud and manipulation, has won the House for the Reps (the Dems have been beating the Reps on total vote count, consistently, for a long time now).
    The Dems had a technical majority (if you ignore the Blue Dogs) in both houses of Congress and the White House, for about 7 months - for about three of which Congress was in session. That's the window that got Obamacare through, on a "reconciliation" vote in the Senate (no chance of beating a filibuster).
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2017
  23. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Sure.

    So basically your answer is to say we are doomed. Yeah I have been over this with you, no need to go over it again. Many of the working class white voters that voted for Obama voted in Trump, so clearly we got their vote before, so we should be able to get it again, but you will deny this up and down and around town forever, not going to argue with you ad nauseum.

    Yeah sure, compromise, sucks. If the democrats have any balls they will fillibuster hard under trump forcing the republicans to "go nuclear" and bring down the 60 votes minimum to a simple majority, meaning next time we get the senate we won't need a super-majority and we might even have enough votes to let a handful to corporatist democrats revolt.
     

Share This Page