Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   The Populist Democrat's dilemma: "...the alliance between labor unions and bank bashing is a very effective and powerful one as long as it doesn't actually win"   (slate.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1076 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Nov 2013 at 2:36 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



101 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-11-11 02:39:45 PM  
Yes, because the left is really calling for the complete destruction of the banking industry when they argue that banks should be forced to follow existing laws and punished if they do not
 
2013-11-11 02:43:16 PM  
fta Suppose that President Warren rides to town with a raft of new legislation and tough regulators and a set of U.S. Attorneys firmly dedicated to prosecuting financial wrongdoing with the utmost rigor. Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet.

So your argument, essentially, is that crime pays and it would be wrong to do anything about that?
 
2013-11-11 02:44:29 PM  
Hmmmm...the problem (as President Obama found out first hand) isn't that the rhetoric isn't sound.  It's when people don't get instant gratification (i.e. higher taxes on the rich), they get all disillusioned all walk away from their half of the bargain.

Then complain when a parasitic entity like the Tea Party screw everyone over; yet when pointing out if they did their end none of that would happen, they get all defensive.
 
2013-11-11 02:46:17 PM  

Lost Thought 00: Yes, because the left is really calling for the complete destruction of the banking industry when they argue that banks should be forced to follow existing laws and punished if they do not


This.  Restoring Glass-Steagall wouldn't hurt either.
 
2013-11-11 02:48:31 PM  
FTFA:  Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet. And while that might well be good for the country and the middle class broadly, it would cause the tax base in New York and California and other politically blue high-inequality jurisdictions to fall.

Calling bullsh*t here. The rich do not pay a disproportionately high percent of taxes. (They're near historic lows). This reads like the "job creator" BS. For every John Galt that takes his ball and goes home, there are fifty more money-obsessed sociopathic climbers ready to jump into the game.
 
2013-11-11 02:50:02 PM  
wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing
 
2013-11-11 02:52:28 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: FTFA:  Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet. And while that might well be good for the country and the middle class broadly, it would cause the tax base in New York and California and other politically blue high-inequality jurisdictions to fall.

Calling bullsh*t here. The rich do not pay a disproportionately high percent of taxes. (They're near historic lows). This reads like the "job creator" BS. For every John Galt that takes his ball and goes home, there are fifty more money-obsessed sociopathic climbers ready to jump into the game.


Also, if it is successful in assisting in moving people from lower class to middle class, it will expand the tax base on many levels as well.
 
2013-11-11 02:52:30 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: FTFA:  Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet. And while that might well be good for the country and the middle class broadly, it would cause the tax base in New York and California and other politically blue high-inequality jurisdictions to fall.

Calling bullsh*t here. The rich do not pay a disproportionately high percent of taxes. (They're near historic lows). This reads like the "job creator" BS. For every John Galt that takes his ball and goes home, there are fifty more money-obsessed sociopathic climbers ready to jump into the game.


My eyes quite literally rolled out of my head. It took five minutes for me to get those suckers back in there and even now my vision is quite fuzzy. The only real response to this bullshiattery:

gifrific.com
 
2013-11-11 02:52:34 PM  

Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing


It's Matt Yglesias. His entire career is based on being the most centristy of centrist liberals
 
2013-11-11 02:52:35 PM  
So the argument against taxing people who control 70% of the wealth is that if they do so, revenues will fall.

Am I missing something here?
 
2013-11-11 02:53:37 PM  

Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing


Yes. But only because it would reduce the banksters' profits.
 
2013-11-11 02:54:06 PM  
We've already cut deals with a bank that was openly laundering money for Mexican drug lords. I'm convinced we'll simply issue fines when we find one aiding human trafficking as well, it's really only a matter of time. We've lost, it's over.
 
2013-11-11 02:55:14 PM  

Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing


Do centrist liberals, especially those from New York, aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing?

There must be a reason why they don't.
 
2013-11-11 02:56:03 PM  

sendtodave: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

Do centrist liberals, especially those from New York, aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing?

There must be a reason why they don't.


Yes, because they're giant capitalist whores like most of the rest of the government.
 
2013-11-11 02:57:15 PM  

Lost Thought 00: Yes, because the left is really calling for the complete destruction of the banking industry when they argue that banks should be forced to follow existing laws and punished if they do not


Depends on who you call "the left."

I'd say that occupy types do want drastic changes to the banking system. Are they not the left?

Only centrists count?
 
2013-11-11 02:57:36 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

It's Matt Yglesias. His entire career is based on being the most centristy of centrist liberals


How is that centrist? Centrism should at least pay lip service to criminal justice.
 
2013-11-11 02:58:01 PM  
What's a union?
 
2013-11-11 02:59:00 PM  
You can only go Galt if you've got something valuable to take with you.
Wall Street investors are just middlemen. They literally have nothing but what they can skim off the top. They can't go Galt, they'll have no one to skim off of.
 
2013-11-11 02:59:23 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: A Dark Evil Omen: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

It's Matt Yglesias. His entire career is based on being the most centristy of centrist liberals

How is that centrist? Centrism should at least pay lip service to criminal justice.


Pardon me, "centrist".

""""centrist""""

You know, conservative capitalist who doesn't necessarily think that minorities should be ACTIVELY denied civil rights. Centrist.
 
2013-11-11 02:59:41 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

Do centrist liberals, especially those from New York, aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing?

There must be a reason why they don't.

Yes, because they're giant capitalist whores like most of the rest of the government.


So, TFA raises a good point.

They don't really have any incentive to change things. Anyone that does can't win.
 
2013-11-11 03:01:07 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Bennie Crabtree: A Dark Evil Omen: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

It's Matt Yglesias. His entire career is based on being the most centristy of centrist liberals

How is that centrist? Centrism should at least pay lip service to criminal justice.

Pardon me, "centrist".

""""centrist""""

You know, conservative capitalist who doesn't necessarily think that minorities should be ACTIVELY denied civil rights. Centrist.


Yeah, I pictured you doing that little finger quote thing.
 
2013-11-11 03:02:10 PM  

sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

Do centrist liberals, especially those from New York, aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing?

There must be a reason why they don't.

Yes, because they're giant capitalist whores like most of the rest of the government.

So, TFA raises a good point.

They don't really have any incentive to change things. Anyone that does can't win.


Well, it means all that rhetoric is just blowing smoke. Which is why we're starting to see things like major unions backing Socialist Alternative candidates in local races; the Democrats are not particularly good allies of working people.
 
2013-11-11 03:03:18 PM  

sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

Do centrist liberals, especially those from New York, aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing?

There must be a reason why they don't.

Yes, because they're giant capitalist whores like most of the rest of the government.

So, TFA raises a good point.

They don't really have any incentive to change things. Anyone that does can't win.


*are deeply opposed to even attempting to win
 
2013-11-11 03:03:42 PM  
also, FTA:
... and when I look at this new generation of [Republican] leaders I see leaders that are all echoing Reagan.

Younger Democratic politicians are less worshipful of Clinton.



I think this fits with the conservatives heavy christian influence.  By Nature, they look for idols.


Liberals tend to look more at problems and solutions.  They are also more passionate about ideas and solutions than an particular person.

This is also why Fox news is so much more popular than MSNBC, and why AM talk radio is so predominately "conservative."  They need a hero.  Someone to speak for them.

I think this also play to the "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line," statement.
 
2013-11-11 03:03:59 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

Do centrist liberals, especially those from New York, aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing?

There must be a reason why they don't.

Yes, because they're giant capitalist whores like most of the rest of the government.

So, TFA raises a good point.

They don't really have any incentive to change things. Anyone that does can't win.

Well, it means all that rhetoric is just blowing smoke. Which is why we're starting to see things like major unions backing Socialist Alternative candidates in local races; the Democrats are not particularly good allies of working people.


Do you feel that Warren is being honest?
 
2013-11-11 03:08:37 PM  
Centrist democrats never really cared about unions or socialism, and centrist republicans never really cared about God or smaller government.

All about the Benjies.

Right wing whackos have the balls to go nuts and hold their party hostage to get what they want. Why not left wing nuts?
 
2013-11-11 03:11:12 PM  

sendtodave: Centrist democrats never really cared about unions or socialism, and centrist republicans never really cared about God or smaller government.

All about the Benjies.

Right wing whackos have the balls to go nuts and hold their party hostage to get what they want. Why not left wing nuts?


"Moderate" Republicans actively court and support the far right. Democrats actively attack the far (or not really far at all) left and drive them out, and take pride in "driving away the crazies".
 
2013-11-11 03:13:23 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Centrist democrats never really cared about unions or socialism, and centrist republicans never really cared about God or smaller government.

All about the Benjies.

Right wing whackos have the balls to go nuts and hold their party hostage to get what they want. Why not left wing nuts?

"Moderate" Republicans actively court and support the far right. Democrats actively attack the far (or not really far at all) left and drive them out, and take pride in "driving away the crazies".


Better fascism or theocracy in our political discourse than SOCIALISM.

This is America.
 
2013-11-11 03:15:02 PM  
Isn't Yglesias the neoliberal shill who made an ass of himself defending sweatshops in Bangladesh after that awful factory collapse?  fark him.
 
2013-11-11 03:16:33 PM  

sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Jackson Herring: wow is that article seriously saying it would be a bad thing to aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing

Do centrist liberals, especially those from New York, aggressively prosecute financial wrongdoing?

There must be a reason why they don't.

Yes, because they're giant capitalist whores like most of the rest of the government.

So, TFA raises a good point.

They don't really have any incentive to change things. Anyone that does can't win.

Well, it means all that rhetoric is just blowing smoke. Which is why we're starting to see things like major unions backing Socialist Alternative candidates in local races; the Democrats are not particularly good allies of working people.

Do you feel that Warren is being honest?


Are we talking Warren the person or Warren™, the network of thousands of advisors, committee members, appointees, and hangers on who will actually execute policy? They could be pretty radically different entities during a hypothetical presidency and, there is some cause for pessimism about it.

I would probably vote for her at least once though.
 
2013-11-11 03:17:28 PM  
Between this and the Benghazi article a few below...

since when did Slate go from "lame articles that try too hard to sound smart" to "outright trolling"?
 
2013-11-11 03:18:08 PM  

birdboy2000: Isn't Yglesias the neoliberal shill who made an ass of himself defending sweatshops in Bangladesh after that awful factory collapse?


I don't know, is he?
 
2013-11-11 03:21:35 PM  
 
2013-11-11 03:23:26 PM  
I could have sworn that Matt Yglesias and Dave Wiegel were rational, maybe a little left-leaning in their views but generally responsible in their reporting.  Am I thinking of someone else? Is Slate having a Bizarro-World Day?  Did my malfunctioning toaster send me to a different quantum universe again?*

/*Not getting laid in this one either, it seems.
 
2013-11-11 03:24:33 PM  

birdboy2000: Dusk-You-n-me

I remembered correctly.  http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/04/24/international_factory_s afety.html


Yeeeeep.

Neoliberal.

Well, that doesn't really change much. His argument is that centrist neoliberalism beats populist (social) liberalism.
 
2013-11-11 03:27:28 PM  

lockers: UrukHaiGuyz: FTFA:  Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet. And while that might well be good for the country and the middle class broadly, it would cause the tax base in New York and California and other politically blue high-inequality jurisdictions to fall.

Calling bullsh*t here. The rich do not pay a disproportionately high percent of taxes. (They're near historic lows). This reads like the "job creator" BS. For every John Galt that takes his ball and goes home, there are fifty more money-obsessed sociopathic climbers ready to jump into the game.

My eyes quite literally rolled out of my head. It took five minutes for me to get those suckers back in there and even now my vision is quite fuzzy. The only real response to this bullshiattery:

[gifrific.com image 245x285]


www.washingtonpost.com

I'm sorry; my graphic isn't animated. On the other hand, it does show that you're a lying partisan tool, so there's that.
 
2013-11-11 03:27:46 PM  

birdboy2000: I remembered correctly. http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/04/24/international_factory_s afety.html


The update at the top there has a pretty good explanation of how he approached the subject. It was a reply to someone else. He wasn't calling the incident OK, he was saying that trying to implement a "unified global standard for safety" is ill-advised (and I don't necessarily agree with that, but it's a different point-of-view to consider). But yes, the title of the original piece was sloppy, and could easily be construed as forgiving what happened over there.
 
2013-11-11 03:28:19 PM  

sendtodave: I'd say that occupy types do want drastic changes to the banking system. Are they not the left?


Do they hold elected office? Then no, they do not count
 
2013-11-11 03:29:32 PM  

Lochsteppe: I could have sworn that Matt Yglesias and Dave Wiegel were rational, maybe a little left-leaning in their views but generally responsible in their reporting.  Am I thinking of someone else? Is Slate having a Bizarro-World Day?  Did my malfunctioning toaster send me to a different quantum universe again?*

/*Not getting laid in this one either, it seems.


Yglesias has never been sane in this universe. You are definitely from Elsewhere.

Does the toaster at least still make toast?
 
2013-11-11 03:29:52 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Centrist democrats never really cared about unions or socialism, and centrist republicans never really cared about God or smaller government.

All about the Benjies.

Right wing whackos have the balls to go nuts and hold their party hostage to get what they want. Why not left wing nuts?

"Moderate" Republicans actively court and support the far right. Democrats actively attack the far (or not really far at all) left and drive them out, and take pride in "driving away the crazies".


Actually, thinking on it, this answers a different question. This answers why the centrists in the party care.

Right wingers look at centrist republicans and say "they might as well be Democrats."
Left wingers look at centrist Democrats and say "they might as well be Republicans."

But the right wingers are screaming for internal change. They don't believe their party should have moderates.

Left wingers got "that's why I vote socialist now!"

Why is that?
 
2013-11-11 03:31:08 PM  

Lost Thought 00: sendtodave: I'd say that occupy types do want drastic changes to the banking system. Are they not the left?

Do they hold elected office? Then no, they do not count


Interdasting.

So, left wing liberal socialist really means neoliberal moderate. Limbaugh was right all along.
 
2013-11-11 03:31:41 PM  

sendtodave: Depends on who you call "the left."

I'd say that occupy types do want drastic changes to the banking system. Are they not the left?

Only centrists count?


Only centrists and right-wingers exist in any sort of elected office.  Is there really a single Boots Riley-quoting OWS member in the House?  Because there are 54 members of the Tea Party Caucus (and more than that who take Tea Party-affiliate money).
 
2013-11-11 03:34:57 PM  

Lawnchair: sendtodave: Depends on who you call "the left."

I'd say that occupy types do want drastic changes to the banking system. Are they not the left?

Only centrists count?

Only centrists and right-wingers exist in any sort of elected office.  Is there really a single Boots Riley-quoting OWS member in the House?  Because there are 54 members of the Tea Party Caucus (and more than that who take Tea Party-affiliate money).


Is this why a populist Democrat is so scary?

Cause, I mean, there were a lot of people that voted for change. Not just another neoliberal.

Even when a populist is allowed to win, they're not allowed to win.
 
2013-11-11 03:35:32 PM  
In this day in age people are very prone to hyperbole, but I have to say with no exaggeration that this is one of the single stupidest articles that I have ever read, and I cannot believe that this person actually got paid to write that.

/last gasps
 
2013-11-11 03:38:10 PM  

BMulligan: lockers: UrukHaiGuyz: FTFA:  Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet. And while that might well be good for the country and the middle class broadly, it would cause the tax base in New York and California and other politically blue high-inequality jurisdictions to fall.

Calling bullsh*t here. The rich do not pay a disproportionately high percent of taxes. (They're near historic lows). This reads like the "job creator" BS. For every John Galt that takes his ball and goes home, there are fifty more money-obsessed sociopathic climbers ready to jump into the game.

My eyes quite literally rolled out of my head. It took five minutes for me to get those suckers back in there and even now my vision is quite fuzzy. The only real response to this bullshiattery:

[gifrific.com image 245x285]

[www.washingtonpost.com image 564x357]

I'm sorry; my graphic isn't animated. On the other hand, it does show that you're a lying partisan tool, so there's that.


I've been trying to find a way to explain to you why this graphic shows nothing useful, but it's hard to do so.

This graphic shows the percentage of a person's income that they pay in taxes, not their total share of the American tax bill. Unless you think that 28+30+30+29+27+25+21+17 = 100
 
2013-11-11 03:39:35 PM  

sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Centrist democrats never really cared about unions or socialism, and centrist republicans never really cared about God or smaller government.

All about the Benjies.

Right wing whackos have the balls to go nuts and hold their party hostage to get what they want. Why not left wing nuts?

"Moderate" Republicans actively court and support the far right. Democrats actively attack the far (or not really far at all) left and drive them out, and take pride in "driving away the crazies".

Actually, thinking on it, this answers a different question. This answers why the centrists in the party care.

Right wingers look at centrist republicans and say "they might as well be Democrats."
Left wingers look at centrist Democrats and say "they might as well be Republicans."

But the right wingers are screaming for internal change. They don't believe their party should have moderates.

Left wingers got "that's why I vote socialist now!"

Why is that?


Again, because the Republicans have encouraged the far right, courted them, funded them, given them endless platforms to spew their bullshiat, etc etc. The Democrats will drive out even a moderate social democrat like Bernie Sanders. The Dems do not want us.

This is what people seem to have a problem grasping: Democrats aren't socialists. At all. That is not their tradition. They don't want to talk to us, they don't want us around. The Democratic Party's tradition and culture goes back to the Progressive Era: High-handed, pro-government, pro-capitalist reformists. By the modern, conventional left-right economic axis, Democrats are situated firmly to the right. There is a small wing of center-left politicians ensconced in the Democratic Party and they are without honor or any particular voice in their own party.

There is something like a quarter to a third of the country that neither party courts as voters or even wants to acknowledge. At best we get high-handed dictates that we have to support the Democrats and on no account should expect or ask for any support in exchange.
 
2013-11-11 03:41:56 PM  

Moosecakes: BMulligan: lockers: UrukHaiGuyz: FTFA:  Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet. And while that might well be good for the country and the middle class broadly, it would cause the tax base in New York and California and other politically blue high-inequality jurisdictions to fall.

Calling bullsh*t here. The rich do not pay a disproportionately high percent of taxes. (They're near historic lows). This reads like the "job creator" BS. For every John Galt that takes his ball and goes home, there are fifty more money-obsessed sociopathic climbers ready to jump into the game.

My eyes quite literally rolled out of my head. It took five minutes for me to get those suckers back in there and even now my vision is quite fuzzy. The only real response to this bullshiattery:

[gifrific.com image 245x285]

[www.washingtonpost.com image 564x357]

I'm sorry; my graphic isn't animated. On the other hand, it does show that you're a lying partisan tool, so there's that.

I've been trying to find a way to explain to you why this graphic shows nothing useful, but it's hard to do so.

This graphic shows the percentage of a person's income that they pay in taxes, not their total share of the American tax bill. Unless you think that 28+30+30+29+27+25+21+17 = 100


I'm not sure why that really matters.

If I pay 30%, and you pay 30%, and you make twice as much I do, well, you paid more!

...

So what?
 
2013-11-11 03:44:10 PM  

sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Centrist democrats never really cared about unions or socialism, and centrist republicans never really cared about God or smaller government.

All about the Benjies.

Right wing whackos have the balls to go nuts and hold their party hostage to get what they want. Why not left wing nuts?

"Moderate" Republicans actively court and support the far right. Democrats actively attack the far (or not really far at all) left and drive them out, and take pride in "driving away the crazies".

Actually, thinking on it, this answers a different question. This answers why the centrists in the party care.

Right wingers look at centrist republicans and say "they might as well be Democrats."
Left wingers look at centrist Democrats and say "they might as well be Republicans."

But the right wingers are screaming for internal change. They don't believe their party should have moderates.

Left wingers got "that's why I vote socialist now!"

Why is that?


The corporate interests in both parties fund each parties right wiis, empowering.

And the Far Left in the US is trapped in permanent emergency mode. Every single Republican is the harbinger of fascism and defeating them is far more important than any policing of our own yard.
 
2013-11-11 03:44:41 PM  

BMulligan: lockers: UrukHaiGuyz: FTFA:  Well if it works, the pre-tax income of Wall Street types is going to plummet. And while that might well be good for the country and the middle class broadly, it would cause the tax base in New York and California and other politically blue high-inequality jurisdictions to fall.

Calling bullsh*t here. The rich do not pay a disproportionately high percent of taxes. (They're near historic lows). This reads like the "job creator" BS. For every John Galt that takes his ball and goes home, there are fifty more money-obsessed sociopathic climbers ready to jump into the game.

My eyes quite literally rolled out of my head. It took five minutes for me to get those suckers back in there and even now my vision is quite fuzzy. The only real response to this bullshiattery:

[gifrific.com image 245x285]

[www.washingtonpost.com image 564x357]

I'm sorry; my graphic isn't animated. On the other hand, it does show that you're a lying partisan tool, so there's that.


I should be upset that the group controlling 70% of the wealth in the country pays 29% of their income in taxes? Seems like they're doing just fine.

Any graph like that that fails to include cap gains as income is bullsh*t.
 
2013-11-11 03:47:36 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: A Dark Evil Omen: sendtodave: Centrist democrats never really cared about unions or socialism, and centrist republicans never really cared about God or smaller government.

All about the Benjies.

Right wing whackos have the balls to go nuts and hold their party hostage to get what they want. Why not left wing nuts?

"Moderate" Republicans actively court and support the far right. Democrats actively attack the far (or not really far at all) left and drive them out, and take pride in "driving away the crazies".

Actually, thinking on it, this answers a different question. This answers why the centrists in the party care.

Right wingers look at centrist republicans and say "they might as well be Democrats."
Left wingers look at centrist Democrats and say "they might as well be Republicans."

But the right wingers are screaming for internal change. They don't believe their party should have moderates.

Left wingers got "that's why I vote socialist now!"

Why is that?

Again, because the Republicans have encouraged the far right, courted them, funded them, given them endless platforms to spew their bullshiat, etc etc. The Democrats will drive out even a moderate social democrat like Bernie Sanders. The Dems do not want us.

This is what people seem to have a problem grasping: Democrats aren't socialists. At all. That is not their tradition. They don't want to talk to us, they don't want us around. The Democratic Party's tradition and culture goes back to the Progressive Era: High-handed, pro-government, pro-capitalist reformists. By the modern, conventional left-right economic axis, Democrats are situated firmly to the right. There is a small wing of center-left politicians ensconced in the Democratic Party and they are without honor or any particular voice in their own party.

There is something like a quarter to a third of the country that neither party courts as voters or even wants to acknowledge. At best we get high-handed dictates that we have to support the Democrats and on no account should expect or ask for any support in exchange.


Welp.

I guess the idea that Democrats support socialist ideas is a lie that both major parties can agree on.
 
Displayed 50 of 101 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report