A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

[bongsaway]

A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I see and hear the younger progressives speaking out about their views and ideas. Does this imply to you there is a big rift in the party?

I say the more ideas the better. I also think the dems are much more united in several areas and there really isn't much policy difference between them, just how to implement the ideas.

Health care for all in some shape or form. Immigration, the craziness that is going on is insane. Income inequality, tax breaks for the middle and lower classes and raising taxes in some way shape or form from those who can afford it. Stop all the loopholes that allow the insanely wealthy to hide money and dodge paying their fair share of taxes. Legalize cannabis and tax it just like alcohol. Education, infrastructure, ethics reviews, stop paying congressional sex offenders legal bills. The criminal justice system and address the out of control cops. Border security and on and on. I'm pretty sure every democrat running will hit on several of these topics.

Thoughts?

 

[Slavister]

I think they are all united behind undoing what Trump is doing and preventing such abuses in future (at least as evidenced by the HR1 bill). That's good enough for me if Trump is the other option. If Trump is not Republican nominee, I would be more discriminating and might even vote for a Republican (e.g. if Democratic nominee is proposing a wealth tax like Warren).

P.S. I assume you are asking about the main 2020 Presidential election. For primaries, I plan to vote in Republican ones to vote for any opposition to Trump, if there is any.

 

[tres borrachos]

I think they are all united behind undoing what Trump is doing and preventing such abuses in future (at least as evidenced by the HR1 bill). That's good enough for me if Trump is the other option.

P.S. I assume you are asking about the main 2020 Presidential election. For primaries, I plan to vote in Republican ones to vote for any opposition to Trump, if there is any.

Same here!

 

[chuckiechan]

A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I see and hear the younger progressives speaking out about their views and ideas. Does this imply to you there is a big rift in the party?

I say the more ideas the better. I also think the dems are much more united in several areas and there really isn't much policy difference between them, just how to implement the ideas.

Health care for all in some shape or form. Immigration, the craziness that is going on is insane. Income inequality, tax breaks for the middle and lower classes and raising taxes in some way shape or form from those who can afford it. Stop all the loopholes that allow the insanely wealthy to hide money and dodge paying their fair share of taxes. Legalize cannabis and tax it just like alcohol. Education, infrastructure, ethics reviews, stop paying congressional sex offenders legal bills. The criminal justice system and address the out of control cops. Border security and on and on. I'm pretty sure every democrat running will hit on several of these topics.

Thoughts?

You are making it too complicated. It's about the power to do what they aren't telling you.

Elections are about difference. If you run two candidates that are too moderate - read that as pitching what the center wants, then it's hard for voters to take a side. So to combat that, you offer a stark difference - the loony left vs the loony right, delivering a "Moderate" message after the lay out their bona fides for the extremes in their parties.

So now you have the calls for 90% tax, free everything for everyone, citizen or not. Free this, free that. Every one in the center where the battle is fought knows it is fantasy land.

Those that go out to pitch the crazy stuff are fund raising on it. That's all.

Thus, do not write off the message Howard Shultz is sending: "don't send a whack job up in 2020".

 

[OrphanSlug]

A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I see and hear the younger progressives speaking out about their views and ideas. Does this imply to you there is a big rift in the party?

I say the more ideas the better. I also think the dems are much more united in several areas and there really isn't much policy difference between them, just how to implement the ideas.

Health care for all in some shape or form. Immigration, the craziness that is going on is insane. Income inequality, tax breaks for the middle and lower classes and raising taxes in some way shape or form from those who can afford it. Stop all the loopholes that allow the insanely wealthy to hide money and dodge paying their fair share of taxes. Legalize cannabis and tax it just like alcohol. Education, infrastructure, ethics reviews, stop paying congressional sex offenders legal bills. The criminal justice system and address the out of control cops. Border security and on and on. I'm pretty sure every democrat running will hit on several of these topics.

Thoughts?

Factions within the Democratic Party are nothing new, but we may be seeing a slightly wider gap between them as opposed to just 10 years ago. We have seen this play out with things such as Sanders vs. Clinton for the 2016 primary seeing how all those voters aligned with one or the other, and we have seen it before with more moderate or centrist Democrats vs. those on the west coast or northeast that tend to be further liberal.

What I think we are seeing is the difference between more classical takes on liberalism that tend to be about using government power to ensure freedoms, against factions that are more modern liberalism rooted in using government power as a means to economic and or social ends.

Moreover, and as I mentioned above, I am certain the Democratic Party upset plenty of their more younger voters that aligned themselves behind Sanders (or Warren) styles of thinking when they all rallied behind Hillary and all of her baggage to an epic failure against Trump.

Now that it happened that way, it will take someone who can appeal to the factions without it appearing like Democratic elites picking their next front runner. On the issues that move votes the various factions are closer on more than they are apart on others, unifying behind someone appealing to enough of them will be amplified with the idea of handling Trump more losses (reference to the midterms seeing the House end up in Democrat's hands.)

 

[btthegreat]

A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I see and hear the younger progressives speaking out about their views and ideas. Does this imply to you there is a big rift in the party?

I say the more ideas the better. I also think the dems are much more united in several areas and there really isn't much policy difference between them, just how to implement the ideas.

Health care for all in some shape or form. Immigration, the craziness that is going on is insane. Income inequality, tax breaks for the middle and lower classes and raising taxes in some way shape or form from those who can afford it. Stop all the loopholes that allow the insanely wealthy to hide money and dodge paying their fair share of taxes. Legalize cannabis and tax it just like alcohol. Education, infrastructure, ethics reviews, stop paying congressional sex offenders legal bills. The criminal justice system and address the out of control cops. Border security and on and on. I'm pretty sure every democrat running will hit on several of these topics.

Thoughts?

You have several natural divisions inherent in the party. 1. the urban v rural split. 2. the economic moderate v more socialist/ progressive split. 3 the generational split between millennials and baby boomers/retirees. These are important and will require more than a band-aide. Then you have some under the radar cultural and religious tensions within the party. We have pro Israel and pro Palestinian Dems. We have some Dems that are inherently skeptical of religion and religious figures, while others are devout Methodists, Muslims, Jews or Catholics. We have our union supporters and our supporters of free trade practices and then there are still hawks and doves in our party.

The only Dem who's opinion I am not interested in listening to, is a bigoted Dem. We have some of those too and Donald Trump can keep them in his coalition.

Trump is nothing if not a unifier of the Democratic party.

 

[Cardinal]

A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I see and hear the younger progressives speaking out about their views and ideas. Does this imply to you there is a big rift in the party?

I say the more ideas the better. I also think the dems are much more united in several areas and there really isn't much policy difference between them, just how to implement the ideas.

Health care for all in some shape or form. Immigration, the craziness that is going on is insane. Income inequality, tax breaks for the middle and lower classes and raising taxes in some way shape or form from those who can afford it. Stop all the loopholes that allow the insanely wealthy to hide money and dodge paying their fair share of taxes. Legalize cannabis and tax it just like alcohol. Education, infrastructure, ethics reviews, stop paying congressional sex offenders legal bills. The criminal justice system and address the out of control cops. Border security and on and on. I'm pretty sure every democrat running will hit on several of these topics.

Thoughts?

The Democratic Party seems to be more united than not on the core issues. Ironically, Trump has made this very easy to do by launching a frontal attack on our core issues, which makes them very easy to grasp. So the primary differences, as I see it, is which personality is most suited to win an election campaign against Trump.

 

[MrWonka]

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I think it's more about making it seem that way. I think a lot of the old guard is very fearful of some of the younger generations who have embraced the word Socialism. Even though their ideas don't really amount to Socialism, and they aren't that much different than the ideas supported by some of the old guards they're very leery about the word itself because they've seen it weaponized against them in the '90s.

Quick History lesson for all the younger Bernie people that hated Hillary Clinton, but back in the early 1990s the Clinton's tried to pass single payer medicine just like Bernie and AOC are asking for today. Even as recently as 2008 when Hillary ran against Obama she was the one supporting Single payer, and had she won the nomination there's a very good chance we would already have it today.

But in the past, Republicans accusing Democrats of being socialist and communist has been a very effective if not dishonest tactic, and voluntarily opening yourself up to those attacks by choosing to refer to yourself as a socialist could be dangerous.

I have definately seen evidence that the term is viewed much more favorably today, and I think that by owning the term and dictating it's meaning Bernie has mitigated the damage that some of those attacks can do, but it still remains to be seen how it will play in a national election, and I think the older Democrats who were burned by it in the '90s are legitimately once bitten twice shy.

Now on a personal level, I would much rather see us stick with the ACA, and make some modifications to alleviate some of the unforeseen issues that came up with it. Over the last few years, we've seen these markets stabilize fairly well, and I think another major shake-up would be a bad move at this juncture. I think this is really the biggest rift within the party.

Do we really want to go full blown single payer or would we rather continue to improve the ACA?

 

[Rosie1]

I don't see republicans supporting a wealth tax any time soon, even though a scarce republican president may have in the past. The republican party has evolved in to the pro-corporation party too much.

There may not be a basic divide among democrats, so much as an understanding divide. Younger progressives want to change many things immediately, whereas older democrats understand, if they don't stay united behind policies and presidential candidates; the right will exploit this and may stick us with the atrocious, like Trump.

Look how Republicans try to demonize Pelosi, and other female democratic politicians. The right may say dems are divided. IMO, the 2016 election proved, republicans are willing to do anything, with anyone (even Russia) to win.

 

[MrPeanut]

As someone who is a pretty big fan of the rhetoric Sanders, AOC, and Warren are injecting into the conversation I have to say that I don't see a massive rift in the party. I think it's healthy for a party to have representatives that span the spectrum on certain issues as long as they are united on core issues. I am a big believer in aggressively debating policies and then standing united when it is time to vote.

 

[Mycroft]

A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I see and hear the younger progressives speaking out about their views and ideas. Does this imply to you there is a big rift in the party?

I say the more ideas the better. I also think the dems are much more united in several areas and there really isn't much policy difference between them, just how to implement the ideas.

Health care for all in some shape or form. Immigration, the craziness that is going on is insane. Income inequality, tax breaks for the middle and lower classes and raising taxes in some way shape or form from those who can afford it. Stop all the loopholes that allow the insanely wealthy to hide money and dodge paying their fair share of taxes. Legalize cannabis and tax it just like alcohol. Education, infrastructure, ethics reviews, stop paying congressional sex offenders legal bills. The criminal justice system and address the out of control cops. Border security and on and on. I'm pretty sure every democrat running will hit on several of these topics.

Thoughts?

Anyone who is a Dem or thinking of voting Dem is irrelevant. It doesn't matter a bit if they are split on issues or not. Their politicians will mouth whatever they think their rabble (their opinion of their base) want to hear...and then, when elected, will do whatever their big money donors what them to do.

The Dem politicians don't work for their Party rank and file. The rank and file work for them.

btw, it's the same with the Republicans, though not to the same degree. Republicans are more likely to question their Republican Elites than the Dems do.

 

[Cardinal]

As someone who is a pretty big fan of the rhetoric Sanders, AOC, and Warren are injecting into the conversation I have to say that I don't see a massive rift in the party. I think it's healthy for a party to have representatives that span the spectrum on certain issues as long as they are united on core issues. I am a big believer in aggressively debating policies and then standing united when it is time to vote.

It should also be seen as healthy that so many candidates are energized to run. It means they're confident they have an energized base and clear platforms to run on.

By contrast, the RNC has made a loyalty oath to Trump and Trump alone.

 

[Cardinal]

Anyone who is a Dem or thinking of voting Dem is irrelevant. It doesn't matter a bit if they are split on issues or not. Their politicians will mouth whatever they think their rabble (their opinion of their base) want to hear...and then, when elected, will do whatever their big money donors what them to do.

The Dem politicians don't work for their Party rank and file. The rank and file work for them.

btw, it's the same with the Republicans, though not to the same degree. Republicans are more likely to question their Republican Elites than the Dems do.

The RNC has made a loyalty oath to Trump.

 

[Kobie]

Anyone who is a Dem or thinking of voting Dem is irrelevant. It doesn't matter a bit if they are split on issues or not. Their politicians will mouth whatever they think their rabble (their opinion of their base) want to hear...and then, when elected, will do whatever their big money donors what them to do.

The Dem politicians don't work for their Party rank and file. The rank and file work for them.

btw, it's the same with the Republicans, though not to the same degree. Republicans are more likely to question their Republican Elites than the Dems do.

Absolutely nobody cares about your hackish, malinformed and intellectually bereft opinions on Democrats. You have negative credibility. Everything you post is raw sewage.

 

[Mycroft]

The RNC has made a loyalty oath to Trump.

So what?

 

[Cardinal]

So what?

Post #14 addresses your initial post and your followup response satisfactorily.

 

[Mycroft]

Absolutely nobody cares about your hackish, malinformed and intellectually bereft opinions on Democrats. You have negative credibility. Everything you post is raw sewage.

If "nobody cares" (you and that mouse in your pocket, right?), then why are you responding to me?

I must have triggered you, right?

 

[Kobie]

If "nobody cares" (you and that mouse in your pocket, right?), then why are you responding to me?

I must have triggered you, right?

I just felt you needed to know.

 

[ashurbanipal]

A question for dems and anyone thinking of voting democratic.

In your opinion, is the democratic party severely split on issues or are some trying to make it seem that way?

I see and hear the younger progressives speaking out about their views and ideas. Does this imply to you there is a big rift in the party?

I say the more ideas the better. I also think the dems are much more united in several areas and there really isn't much policy difference between them, just how to implement the ideas.

Health care for all in some shape or form. Immigration, the craziness that is going on is insane. Income inequality, tax breaks for the middle and lower classes and raising taxes in some way shape or form from those who can afford it. Stop all the loopholes that allow the insanely wealthy to hide money and dodge paying their fair share of taxes. Legalize cannabis and tax it just like alcohol. Education, infrastructure, ethics reviews, stop paying congressional sex offenders legal bills. The criminal justice system and address the out of control cops. Border security and on and on. I'm pretty sure every democrat running will hit on several of these topics.

Thoughts?

I think there is a rift in the party between the old guard and the new. The reality is much more complex than what i'm about to describe, but of course space is limited in these posts. Essentially, the old guard of both Republicans and Democrats have been pursuing policies that have been to the benefit of some, and the detriment of others. Those policies are a kind of compromise between multiple vectors of political force, and they evolved out of many years of turmoil (namely, the 1960s and 1970s). However, it's becoming clear to an increasing number of people that those policies are bad policies. That's why Hillary lost, and why I actually seriously considered voting for Trump in the early days of his campaign, before all the crazy started to come out (and still, I think at least his rhetoric is correct on a few issues--namely confronting China and re-negotiating our trade deals, though his execution is quite poor).

Consider NAFTA. Prior to Bill Clinton signing NAFTA into law, there was some illegal immigration into this country from Mexico, but it was not as pronounced as it later became. The overall effect of NAFTA was to impoverish a whole generation of Mexican farmers who had previously been making a decent living (the money they had been making flowed to a new class of Mexican millionaires and billionaires), while essentially the same thing happened here. Clinton's policies were great in the short term, but a disaster long term. And even Obama, who ran on the promise of change, only steered the ship a little off the course it was charting. Hillary was going to put it right back on that course--as would have Rubio, Kasich, and other Republicans. Bernie was the democrat candidate who would have pursued very different policies.

The younger generation of democrats and liberals in general (with whose policy preferences I tend more to agree, with some exceptions, especially on gun control) want to change course entirely. They're not aligned with business as usual as is the old guard, because business as usual isn't working.

So yes, there is a rift in the party. There is also one in the Republican party. At this point in history, that rift is probably inevitable, and forebodes some rough times ahead. If we avoid civil war, we will have to negotiate a new set of policies between the younger conservatives and younger liberals. Those policies will, for a time, probably benefit the nation as a whole, but as conditions change, they will gradually lead to a similar situation as we see now, and then yet another negotiation will take place (again, if civil war is avoided).

 

[ashurbanipal]

Anyone who is a Dem or thinking of voting Dem is irrelevant. It doesn't matter a bit if they are split on issues or not. Their politicians will mouth whatever they think their rabble (their opinion of their base) want to hear...and then, when elected, will do whatever their big money donors what them to do.

The Dem politicians don't work for their Party rank and file. The rank and file work for them.

btw, it's the same with the Republicans, though not to the same degree. Republicans are more likely to question their Republican Elites than the Dems do.

I liked this post because, up until the last line, I generally agree. I think both Dems and Repubs split from their elite supporters at about equal rates. But you're correct in that few politicians these days actually act the way their constituents want, and seldom do the things they were elected to do.

 

[Middle_Ground]

It's really hard to see today many of the things the "new" Democrats want. We are running such high debt and deficits it's just hard to see. Who knows maybe that was the Republican plan all along. Spend, spend, spend, tax cut, tax cut, tax cut....then when Dems want to do something for the good of every citizen in the country, scream and cry we cant because of debt and deficits.
I don't disagree with the new Democrats however it's hard to see it currently.

 

[btthegreat]

I think it's more about making it seem that way. I think a lot of the old guard is very fearful of some of the younger generations who have embraced the word Socialism. Even though their ideas don't really amount to Socialism, and they aren't that much different than the ideas supported by some of the old guards they're very leery about the word itself because they've seen it weaponized against them in the '90s.

Quick History lesson for all the younger Bernie people that hated Hillary Clinton, but back in the early 1990s the Clinton's tried to pass single payer medicine just like Bernie and AOC are asking for today. Even as recently as 2008 when Hillary ran against Obama she was the one supporting Single payer, and had she won the nomination there's a very good chance we would already have it today.

But in the past, Republicans accusing Democrats of being socialist and communist has been a very effective if not dishonest tactic, and voluntarily opening yourself up to those attacks by choosing to refer to yourself as a socialist could be dangerous.

I have definately seen evidence that the term is viewed much more favorably today, and I think that by owning the term and dictating it's meaning Bernie has mitigated the damage that some of those attacks can do, but it still remains to be seen how it will play in a national election, and I think the older Democrats who were burned by it in the '90s are legitimately once bitten twice shy.

Now on a personal level, I would much rather see us stick with the ACA, and make some modifications to alleviate some of the unforeseen issues that came up with it. Over the last few years, we've seen these markets stabilize fairly well, and I think another major shake-up would be a bad move at this juncture. I think this is really the biggest rift within the party.

Do we really want to go full blown single payer or would we rather continue to improve the ACA?

Such an excellent contribution here. You caught the real significance of Bernie in the long term. Conservatives have used the 'socialist' label to abort so many great ideas and great candidacies over the last half century. Every investment in people, every effort to mitigate the inherent problems with unfettered capitalism in a democracy dependent on vast quantities of expensive speech, has been threatened or crushed by this label. Mitigation is not destruction. Regulation is not war. Liberalism is not socialism. We need to find out answers to policy and economic problems wherever they may be without regard to a label. That means embracing either a free market inspired solution, a regulated solution, or a socialist inspired solution to particularly thorny issues. Bernie has reclaimed the word and proudly declared that he will stand up for leftist ideas and he will keep getting re-elected do so. That means people with some money to spend, and likeminded ideals need not assume that their contributions to left of center candidates will be laid to rest by the mere accusation of 'socialist' If Socialist Bernie can get reelected in statewide elections and take states in primaries, so can others.

Its a very big deal that the albatross is off our backs and it was the chief reason I voted for a man I knew could not win the nomination.

Doing well was a win.

By the way I agree with your views on ACA, and would like to see if we can use that framework to build on, ( it needed a lot of work before Trump played his games) before going down the single payer road. Its that mitigation idea I was discussing above. if we can't fix ACA and private insurance industry and republicans still thwart and undermine us, single payer is a solid plan B.

 

[Mycroft]

I liked this post because, up until the last line, I generally agree. I think both Dems and Repubs split from their elite supporters at about equal rates. But you're correct in that few politicians these days actually act the way their constituents want, and seldom do the things they were elected to do.

The fact that Reps were able to oppose their Elites and the fact that the Dems weren't. The fact that Reps STILL oppose their Elites while the Dems have pretty much rolled over for their Elites means I am correct.

Show me how I am wrong.

 

[ashurbanipal]

The fact that Reps were able to oppose their Elites and the fact that the Dems weren't. The fact that Reps STILL oppose their Elites while the Dems have pretty much rolled over for their Elites means I am correct.

Show me how I am wrong.

Just look to the previous Presidency. The dem elites wanted Hillary in 2008, but got Obama, who was relatively unknown at the time. The '08 Democrat primary was bitter to the point that there was quite a bit of speculation the Dems had hurt their chances at the Presidency--Obama and Hillary each said things about the other that it didn't look like they could come back from, and the super delegates were initially all in the Hillary camp, and didn't start to change to Obama until he had won enough pledged delegates to mount a challenge at the convention. We knew that McCain was going to be the Republican candidate in March of '08, but we didn't know it would be Obama until June of '08.

Trump's campaign was, of course, different from Obama's in many respects, but it had some similar features in that it was Republican voters who overcame the resistance of party insiders (the elite in question).

 

[Saladin4]

The fact that Reps were able to oppose their Elites and the fact that the Dems weren't. The fact that Reps STILL oppose their Elites while the Dems have pretty much rolled over for their Elites means I am correct.

Show me how I am wrong.

Last checked most of trump's inner circle are wealthy white men....The very definition of "elite"......Try to keep up