2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

CENTRIST MOOKIE is in the industry and would reinstate glass-steagall yesterday!!!!

I believe that would have prevented what happened in 2008. I doubt that the power structure will ever allow it to happen.

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Well played.

Kep, I don't oppose Bernie's proposals necessarily. IMHO he should have fleshed them out a bit more at this point.

I think it's a fair point but only to some extent. We've seen time and time again that if you put out a hyper-detailed position paper your opponents will simply rip it to shreds, which distracts from the overall vision.

I want my think tanks telling me how to best soak the rich. It's enough for my presidential candidate to announce he favors soaking the rich, as distinct from the rest of the field who differ only in the degree to which they'll pucker up before fellating them. There is plenty of time for details after election, and of course those details will change a dozen times during the sausage-making process, so holding yourself to your campaign announced details is suicidal.

So I agree with you to the extent that, say, a candidate should say he favors replacing Obamacare with a single payer system. But as to the gory details of that system, that's something that will be fought over in the Oval Office and the cloak room, and there's no point in boxing yourself in before you get started.

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

CENTRIST MOOKIE is in the industry and would reinstate glass-steagall yesterday!!!!

Perverse contrarian.

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

You work in a bank and have kids.

You are therefore evolving

Well played.

Kep, I don't oppose Bernie's proposals necessarily. IMHO he should have fleshed them out a bit more at this point.

So for example, where does Bernie find Dodd-Frank to be lacking? No Glass-Steagall? Okay great, but what does he hope to accomplish by reinstating that the law hasn't already covered?

Another is his proposal to raise taxes on the rich to pay for college tuition. I love the idea. BUT - at this point in time he should have told us exactly what taxes he's raising and how much of the cost ($70B I think from his campaign) those hikes will cover. The reason is, if he has a solid proposal, like taxing carried interest as normal income, and that covers the cost, that's an easy case to make for whoever gets elected President. If his plan is to raise upper income taxes to 90%, that's not going to fly.

Love her or hate her, but Hillary has been pretty detailed thus far. Elizabeth Warren also is solid in terms of what she wants to do and how she wants to accomplish it. Sometimes Bernie seems like he's just throwing sh! t against the wall and seeing what sticks, and he'll figure out how to get it implemented when he's in the WH. As I've said before though, if he doesn't fill in the blanks, the GOP along with a compliant media will. I would also point Sanders has been in Congress a long time, but doesn't seem to have an ability to win people over to his side to get legislation passed. Yes, he's not always in the majority but that never seemed to stop Ted Kennedy.

[mookie1995]

You suck as a contrarian.

You just fail to understand

[St. Clown]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Those both work!!


And both ARE centrist....

You suck as a contrarian.

[mookie1995]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

CENTRIST MOOKIE is in the industry and would reinstate glass-steagall yesterday!!!!

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

I do get a kick out of my "journey" from being a commie leftist more liberal than Mike Dukakis to someone who apparently hangs out with Joe Lieberman at the DINO social club. While I do like people such as The Bern, I can also agree with them on principle while not wanting them to be my party's nominee. Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

I understand that, though I think you do oppose most of Bernie's economic initiatives. You're in the financial sector, correct? I doubt you'd be pleased to see us slap the cuffs back on Wall Street the way we had them in the 50s through 70s.

I actually "oppose" Bernie in the sense of not believing he is the right messenger, and worrying that message and messenger will become hopelessly conflated if he is the sole speaker of the Gospel of Redistribution. I'd have preferred, for example, Warren, though what I most want to see is a burgeoning lefty movement with many, many energetic and innovative lefties invading the party, much in the way the right fringe took control of the GOP in the 90s.

I also think your constant drumbeat about Bernie's "martyr" follows belies your experience as a close follower of politics. Sanders' folks have not for the most part been the grubby hippies who helped Nader deliver the White House to the Chimperor. They're ward heelers and grassroots insiders, but they're also very practical and understand the Sanders' campaign mission is to push Hillary into doing what's right. Nobody has any illusions that Bernie's going to win the nomination, barring a Hillary heart attack at the 11th hour. Not to mention that since the Clintons' Achilles heel is the perception that they are arrogant and out of touch, Hillary's supporters ought to be bending over backwards to show respect for the rest of the coalition she needs to drag her across the finish line.

[mookie1995]

I do get a kick out of my "journey" from being a commie leftist more liberal than Mike Dukakis to someone who apparently hangs out with Joe Lieberman at the DINO social club. While I do like people such as The Bern, I can also agree with them on principle while not wanting them to be my party's nominee. Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

You work in a bank and have kids.

You are therefore evolving

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Ummm
Rover is a lib
Mookie is a centrist
You, ahem, are a commie/socialist

I do get a kick out of my "journey" from being a commie leftist more liberal than Mike Dukakis to someone who apparently hangs out with Joe Lieberman at the DINO social club. While I do like people such as The Bern, I can also agree with them on principle while not wanting them to be my party's nominee. Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

[mookie1995]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Those both work!!


And both ARE centrist....

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

I wouldn't call you a centrist. I would call you are a Perverse Contrarian.

Or a Pervert Contrarian!

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Ummm
Rover is a lib
Mookie is a centrist
You, ahem, are a commie/socialist

I wouldn't call you a centrist. I would call you are a Perverse Contrarian.

[mookie1995]

Based on your opinions lo these many years I would call you a centrist..

Ummm
Rover is a lib
Mookie is a centrist
You, ahem, are a commie/socialist

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

You're forgetting I'm a liberal myself Kep! While I will take your advice under consideration also take mine when I say Bernie supporters are starting to develop a martyr complex to rival most conservatives, and you should be aware if that sensation starts affecting you as well...

Based on your opinions lo these many years I would call you a centrist. That of course makes you far left compared to the dementia that has taken over the GOP, but these guys would call Bob Dole a communist. I suspect in the 1970s it would have made you a Rockefeller Republican. But... that's OK by me. Everybody's invited into the tent! We just need to stop pretending that actually standing up for liberal principles would hurt us. On the vast majority of issues, the liberals are right at the center of public opinion. It's merely the influence of our own 1% donors that continually drags us back to the center and away from significant liberal policy action.

It's not a surprise that liberal social policies, which are perhaps 60/40 popular, get enacted, while liberal economic policies, which are 70/30 or 80/20 popular, are rebuffed. That was the deal the "New Democrats" cut, and the Democratic party has stuck to it except for those few years in which Howard Dean ran the show (and the Democrats were spectacularly successful).

The descent of the GOP into full lunacy is an opportunity to move forward with a truly left-leaning economic agenda. Fears of criticism by the right are pointless, as they scream like stuck pigs that everything proposed by any Democratic president is Radical Marxism. So, let's show them some actual Radical Marxism, and then settle for a comfortably left-wing compromise. That's the game the right played for decades, and it's delivered to them a complete victory on tax policy despite a 50/50 national split and a significant lack of popularity of their programs. Think of what we could do considering (1) we're correct, (2) our way works, and (3) we're on the correct side of small 'd' democratic opinion.