Quantcast
Official 2020 US Election: Democratic Party Discussion

Forums - Politics Discussion - Official 2020 US Election: Democratic Party Discussion

Jumpin said:

Andrew Yang has adopted the slogan "Not let, not right, but forward" which is interesting, because it's not a Democratic Party slogan but one used by Green Parties. I don't think the US one, in particular, uses it (at least I can't find any reference), but just next door it is the main slogan of the Green Party of Canada, and they've used it since 2008.

I can't seem to find reference of affiliation, is Yang a former Green Party member?

Clever but probably only accurate inside of Europe/Canada. In the US, the left is forward....at least more forward than the right.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network
Jumpin said:
SpokenTruth said:

Senate Leader.  I mean look at the power McConnell wields versus Pence. It's not even close.

I should qualify this by saying it needs to be the Senate Majority Leader.

So maybe Elizabeth Warren would be better as Senate Majority Leader than Vice President if Bernie wins (she would have a chance in 2022). I also think she would do a fantastic job. So maybe Elizabeth Warren isn't Bernie's best option for Vice President, perhaps it is Gillibrand.

The VP has not much to do anyway unless the president dies. He acts as tiebreaker in the senate, but apart from that, the VP has practically nothing to do. Hence why in the past it was pretty common that the VP was someone that got kicked upstairs to shut him out or up for 4-8 years. Of course, that can backfire if the president dies, as that person then takes over as president. One of the reasons why the republicans lost in 2008 was the choice of Palin as VP. McCain was pretty old already, so there was the risk of him dying in office, and relatively few were able to accept someone like her as president at the time



SpokenTruth said:
Jumpin said:

Andrew Yang has adopted the slogan "Not let, not right, but forward" which is interesting, because it's not a Democratic Party slogan but one used by Green Parties. I don't think the US one, in particular, uses it (at least I can't find any reference), but just next door it is the main slogan of the Green Party of Canada, and they've used it since 2008.

I can't seem to find reference of affiliation, is Yang a former Green Party member?

Clever but probably only accurate inside of Europe/Canada. In the US, the left is forward....at least more forward than the right.

The definition of left and right are pretty subjective in the US.

I have found people who have said that Elizabeth Warren is not a leftist. Some claim only Tulsi Gabbard is on the left. Others say only Bernie Sanders is on the left. A large number seem to think Biden is not on the left. It's a bit of a headscratcher to me. Maybe Biden is closer to centrism, but IMO he is clearly on the left.

From my POV all of the candidates except maybe that one balding guy (forget his name) are on the left.

I am unsure what puts Bernie Sanders to the left of Elizabeth Warren and her thrust for strengthening worker union power over the last 7 years, her campaign position on breaking up big corporations, and implement a wealth tax. It seems the majority of people from the US seem to think that Bernie is to the left of that. I think the only thing Bernie is really to the left of Warren on is the rhetoric (she claims to be a capitalist, he claims to be a socialist, the truth is they're both capitalists).

Anyway, it's difficult for me because I think with the US there are a large variety of different opinions of what "left/right" even means, and it is difficult to keep track of them all. It seems to be a selection of arbitrary policy positions that sometimes trade around. But, really a good rule of thumb is:

Right = hierarchy
Left = equality
Conservative = reactionary (can be left or right, but is typically right) - progressive is the opposite of conservative.
Liberal = freedom (can be left or right, and is not necessarily typically left, most right-wingers are actually liberals too) - authoritarian is the opposite of liberal.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
SpokenTruth said:

Clever but probably only accurate inside of Europe/Canada. In the US, the left is forward....at least more forward than the right.

The definition of left and right are pretty subjective in the US.

I have found people who have said that Elizabeth Warren is not a leftist. Some claim only Tulsi Gabbard is on the left. Others say only Bernie Sanders is on the left. A large number seem to think Biden is not on the left. It's a bit of a headscratcher to me. Maybe Biden is closer to centrism, but IMO he is clearly on the left.

From my POV all of the candidates except maybe that one balding guy (forget his name) are on the left.

I am unsure what puts Bernie Sanders to the left of Elizabeth Warren and her thrust for strengthening worker union power over the last 7 years, her campaign position on breaking up big corporations, and implement a wealth tax. It seems the majority of people from the US seem to think that Bernie is to the left of that. I think the only thing Bernie is really to the left of Warren on is the rhetoric (she claims to be a capitalist, he claims to be a socialist, the truth is they're both capitalists).

Anyway, it's difficult for me because I think with the US there are a large variety of different opinions of what "left/right" even means, and it is difficult to keep track of them all. It seems to be a selection of arbitrary policy positions that sometimes trade around. But, really a good rule of thumb is:

Right = hierarchy
Left = equality
Conservative = reactionary (can be left or right, but is typically right) - progressive is the opposite of conservative.
Liberal = freedom (can be left or right, and is not necessarily typically left, most right-wingers are actually liberals too) - authoritarian is the opposite of liberal.

The biggest problem in the US is that due to winner takes all, there are only 2 parties which have any relevance anymore and creating a new party would just make the one closest to the ideals of the new one suffer. As such, it has the same effect as if someone would go and forbid the creation of /new parties. But having only 2 parties is extremely polarizing and eliminates most, if not all nuances over time. This is why democrats vs republicans looks increasingly like the "us vs them" from the late 60's.

With more than just 2 parties it would force the 2 major parties to consider alliances and *gasp* coalitions and concessions to get enough votes for their laws. It would bring nuance back into american politics and finally end the black and white binary thinking that's slowly destroying the american politics from within.



Do you guys think Biden might have some memory problems? His first few gaffes I gave him the benefit of the doubt and he seems like a genuine nice guy so I doubt he's just purposely lying.



Around the Network
jason1637 said:
Do you guys think Biden might have some memory problems? His first few gaffes I gave him the benefit of the doubt and he seems like a genuine nice guy so I doubt he's just purposely lying.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/8xwq4k/biden-had-said-he-worked-the-coal-mines-was-shot-at-in-iraq-and-marched-in-the-civil-rights-movement-he-has-not-done-those-things

Seems he's just a valor thief, at least that's what this article believes. It could be he has a very grandiose sense of himself and also has memory problems, and his mind is filling in with flattering details to give himself more glory. If it's accidental, it's still disgusting, and he should apologize and own up. If it's purposeful, it's disgraceful and disqualifying. If it is in fact accidental, that would explain the gaffe where he claimed to have been VP during a school shooting that happened during the Trump administration. Either way, it makes me even less able to stand him. He's going to be tough to vote for if he wins the nomination. I don't think I'll be able to campaign for him at all.



Jumpin said:

The definition of left and right are pretty subjective in the US.

I have found people who have said that Elizabeth Warren is not a leftist. Some claim only Tulsi Gabbard is on the left. Others say only Bernie Sanders is on the left. A large number seem to think Biden is not on the left. It's a bit of a headscratcher to me. Maybe Biden is closer to centrism, but IMO he is clearly on the left.

From my POV all of the candidates except maybe that one balding guy (forget his name) are on the left.

I am unsure what puts Bernie Sanders to the left of Elizabeth Warren and her thrust for strengthening worker union power over the last 7 years, her campaign position on breaking up big corporations, and implement a wealth tax. It seems the majority of people from the US seem to think that Bernie is to the left of that. I think the only thing Bernie is really to the left of Warren on is the rhetoric (she claims to be a capitalist, he claims to be a socialist, the truth is they're both capitalists).

Anyway, it's difficult for me because I think with the US there are a large variety of different opinions of what "left/right" even means, and it is difficult to keep track of them all. It seems to be a selection of arbitrary policy positions that sometimes trade around. But, really a good rule of thumb is:

Right = hierarchy
Left = equality
Conservative = reactionary (can be left or right, but is typically right) - progressive is the opposite of conservative.
Liberal = freedom (can be left or right, and is not necessarily typically left, most right-wingers are actually liberals too) - authoritarian is the opposite of liberal.

Bernie isn't a capitalist, he's a market socialist economically, a democratic socialist politically, and a reform socialist in strategy. His Political Revolution that he always talks about is his answer to the criticisms of revolutionary socialists that you can't reform the system. He believes that abolition through revolution isn't necessary if there's a political revolution that renews the people's sense of civic duty and interest in public action, which he hopes will create the appetite for the fundamental reforms he proposes that would gradually turn us into a market socialist system. I think his strategy will work if we give it a chance. In the short term though, the main visible difference between him and Warren will be limited to rhetoric. But the signs are on the horizon. I mean have you seen his Green New Deal? Not just 100% renewable, but 100% publicly owned power. He's literally advocating seizing the means of electricity production. He'll do this with healthcare and other sectors of the economy as well. Just because he still supports markets doesn't make him not a socialist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism#Reform_versus_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

People accuse Bernie of being a simple social democrat, but here's a quote from the market socialism article that explains things a bit:

"while social democracy aims to achieve greater economic stability and equality through policy measures such as taxes, subsidies and social welfare programs, market socialism aims to achieve similar goals through changing patterns of enterprise ownership and management"

Hence why publicly owned power is so important to Bernie, as is getting rid of private insurance.



HylianSwordsman said:
jason1637 said:
Do you guys think Biden might have some memory problems? His first few gaffes I gave him the benefit of the doubt and he seems like a genuine nice guy so I doubt he's just purposely lying.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/8xwq4k/biden-had-said-he-worked-the-coal-mines-was-shot-at-in-iraq-and-marched-in-the-civil-rights-movement-he-has-not-done-those-things

Seems he's just a valor thief, at least that's what this article believes. It could be he has a very grandiose sense of himself and also has memory problems, and his mind is filling in with flattering details to give himself more glory. If it's accidental, it's still disgusting, and he should apologize and own up. If it's purposeful, it's disgraceful and disqualifying. If it is in fact accidental, that would explain the gaffe where he claimed to have been VP during a school shooting that happened during the Trump administration. Either way, it makes me even less able to stand him. He's going to be tough to vote for if he wins the nomination. I don't think I'll be able to campaign for him at all.

I don't think he just apologize if it really is memory issues which i'm starting to think it is because he keeps up messing up daily now. If he's just purposely lying and fabricating the truth to make him look better then thats a whole bigger problem but he doesnt seem like the type of guy to do this and it would go against his campaign message.



HylianSwordsman said:
Jumpin said:

The definition of left and right are pretty subjective in the US.

I have found people who have said that Elizabeth Warren is not a leftist. Some claim only Tulsi Gabbard is on the left. Others say only Bernie Sanders is on the left. A large number seem to think Biden is not on the left. It's a bit of a headscratcher to me. Maybe Biden is closer to centrism, but IMO he is clearly on the left.

From my POV all of the candidates except maybe that one balding guy (forget his name) are on the left.

I am unsure what puts Bernie Sanders to the left of Elizabeth Warren and her thrust for strengthening worker union power over the last 7 years, her campaign position on breaking up big corporations, and implement a wealth tax. It seems the majority of people from the US seem to think that Bernie is to the left of that. I think the only thing Bernie is really to the left of Warren on is the rhetoric (she claims to be a capitalist, he claims to be a socialist, the truth is they're both capitalists).

Anyway, it's difficult for me because I think with the US there are a large variety of different opinions of what "left/right" even means, and it is difficult to keep track of them all. It seems to be a selection of arbitrary policy positions that sometimes trade around. But, really a good rule of thumb is:

Right = hierarchy
Left = equality
Conservative = reactionary (can be left or right, but is typically right) - progressive is the opposite of conservative.
Liberal = freedom (can be left or right, and is not necessarily typically left, most right-wingers are actually liberals too) - authoritarian is the opposite of liberal.

Bernie isn't a capitalist, he's a market socialist economically, a democratic socialist politically, and a reform socialist in strategy. His Political Revolution that he always talks about is his answer to the criticisms of revolutionary socialists that you can't reform the system. He believes that abolition through revolution isn't necessary if there's a political revolution that renews the people's sense of civic duty and interest in public action, which he hopes will create the appetite for the fundamental reforms he proposes that would gradually turn us into a market socialist system. I think his strategy will work if we give it a chance. In the short term though, the main visible difference between him and Warren will be limited to rhetoric. But the signs are on the horizon. I mean have you seen his Green New Deal? Not just 100% renewable, but 100% publicly owned power. He's literally advocating seizing the means of electricity production. He'll do this with healthcare and other sectors of the economy as well. Just because he still supports markets doesn't make him not a socialist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism#Reform_versus_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

People accuse Bernie of being a simple social democrat, but here's a quote from the market socialism article that explains things a bit:

"while social democracy aims to achieve greater economic stability and equality through policy measures such as taxes, subsidies and social welfare programs, market socialism aims to achieve similar goals through changing patterns of enterprise ownership and management"

Hence why publicly owned power is so important to Bernie, as is getting rid of private insurance.

"Market socialism is a type of economic system involving the public, cooperative or social ownership of the means of production in the framework of a market economy. " - from your link. So where does Bernie say he wants to implement this? This would, in effect, abolish the bourgeoisie ownership of the means of production in favour of the proletariat.

Giving more authority to the government is not socialism. It simply bolsters the bureaucracy. This can sometimes benefit the people (but so can tyranny), it can also oppress them since it is, in effect, a hierarchy.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
HylianSwordsman said:

Bernie isn't a capitalist, he's a market socialist economically, a democratic socialist politically, and a reform socialist in strategy. His Political Revolution that he always talks about is his answer to the criticisms of revolutionary socialists that you can't reform the system. He believes that abolition through revolution isn't necessary if there's a political revolution that renews the people's sense of civic duty and interest in public action, which he hopes will create the appetite for the fundamental reforms he proposes that would gradually turn us into a market socialist system. I think his strategy will work if we give it a chance. In the short term though, the main visible difference between him and Warren will be limited to rhetoric. But the signs are on the horizon. I mean have you seen his Green New Deal? Not just 100% renewable, but 100% publicly owned power. He's literally advocating seizing the means of electricity production. He'll do this with healthcare and other sectors of the economy as well. Just because he still supports markets doesn't make him not a socialist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism#Reform_versus_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

People accuse Bernie of being a simple social democrat, but here's a quote from the market socialism article that explains things a bit:

"while social democracy aims to achieve greater economic stability and equality through policy measures such as taxes, subsidies and social welfare programs, market socialism aims to achieve similar goals through changing patterns of enterprise ownership and management"

Hence why publicly owned power is so important to Bernie, as is getting rid of private insurance.

"Market socialism is a type of economic system involving the public, cooperative or social ownership of the means of production in the framework of a market economy. " - from your link. So where does Bernie say he wants to implement this? This would, in effect, abolish the bourgeoisie ownership of the means of production in favour of the proletariat.

Giving more authority to the government is not socialism. It simply bolsters the bureaucracy. This can sometimes benefit the people (but so can tyranny), it can also oppress them since it is, in effect, a hierarchy.

In his Green New Deal, like I said. And all over the campaign trail when talking about healthcare. He does in fact want to abolish the bourgeoisie ownership of the means of electricity production, and of healthcare access. Like I said, he's a reform socialist, so he doesn't want to go straight to an actually socialist healthcare system like the UK's NHS, but he does like it, and if he were immortal and president forever, would eventually try to drum up political support for an NHS-like system. He just doesn't campaign on it, because his political strategy for winning is reformism, so advocating for an immediate revolutionary transition to full on socialism isn't his style because he doesn't think it'll work. Just as anyone who read between the lines knew that Trump was a hard-right authoritarian wannabe dictator, it's also fairly obvious that what Bernie is campaigning on isn't the farthest left he's willing to go, it's just his campaign strategy. He offers more than anyone else, so as to start from a good bargaining position, unlike Dems that start from a compromise and end up with a worse compromise,  and then when he gets what he wants, he starts to push for more. He's a reformist socialist.