By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - The US Politics |OT|

Machiavellian said:
Rab said:

How little you have bothered to understand 

AOC is one of the best know examples of kicking out a powerful Est. Dem, she did it by going to the people and talking about their working class issues, it persuaded them to eventually vote for her and trust her in a way that the Dem Est. never could, she beat someone everyone thought was untouchable, the Democratic Caucus Chair Joe Crowley, it was a shocking result for the Est. Dems and Est. Media

She was outspent by a margin of 18 to 1 ($1.5 million to $83,000) but won, talking to the people about their real issues can and did work, it's all pressure, the fat rich dominos will fall 

Still avoiding to answer the question of why the working poor have suffered for decades under the Compromise Dem Est. (CDE), and why would you continue to use the same failed strategy ever again?

AOC and the gang of four, actually that is a pretty good example.  I await to see how they change the current climate within Washington.  T

As to why the working poor have suffered its because they do not vote.  That is pretty obvious.  If they voted in large enough numbers then the Senate and House would be a very different place.  Votes count, which we continue to state which you continue to ignore.  Votes get things done, might not be fast enough for you but that is the reality. 

You keep talking about the same failed strategy but you still avoid the question, how do you get something done now.  So what is your plan to get something done now.  You still have Joe there in the way, so your plan is that you can get rid of Joe by next election cycle and put a progressive in his seat.  Its a waste of time arguing this point.  Lets see it happen.  

Yes AOC and others like her (the next Gen) are great examples of what can be done, their votes in government will make a difference 

I never once talked about getting results "now", your arguing with imagined shadows there I'm afraid

The working poor shouldn't have to wait forever or even a few decades because of the compromise strategy you so fondly endorse, maybe not "now" but much sooner than your Est. status quo could ever achieved based off it's track record so far, which is abysmal  

How has that compromise strategy worked in helping the poor or on gun control in a meaningful way, people would love to know, you have never addressed that point and I have asked repeatedly, I know you don't have an answer but I just want you to reflect on it ;)   

Last edited by Rab - on 17 February 2021

Around the Network
Rab said:
Machiavellian said:

AOC and the gang of four, actually that is a pretty good example.  I await to see how they change the current climate within Washington.  T

As to why the working poor have suffered its because they do not vote.  That is pretty obvious.  If they voted in large enough numbers then the Senate and House would be a very different place.  Votes count, which we continue to state which you continue to ignore.  Votes get things done, might not be fast enough for you but that is the reality. 

You keep talking about the same failed strategy but you still avoid the question, how do you get something done now.  So what is your plan to get something done now.  You still have Joe there in the way, so your plan is that you can get rid of Joe by next election cycle and put a progressive in his seat.  Its a waste of time arguing this point.  Lets see it happen.  

Yes AOC and others like her (the next Gen) are great examples of what can be done, their votes in government will make a difference 

I never once talked about getting results "now", you arguing with imagined shadows there I'm afraid

The working poor shouldn't have to wait forever or even a few decades because of the compromise strategy you so fondly endorse, maybe not "now" but much sooner than your Est. status quo could ever achieved based off it's track record so far, which is abysmal  

How has that compromise strategy worked in helping the poor or on gun control in a meaningful way, people would love to know, you have never addressed that point and I have asked repeatedly, I know you don't have an answer but I just want you to reflect on it ;)   

What is your alternate proposal? Because without compromise, things for minority interests can’t happen in a Democratic system if it is not in the interests of the majority of the representative bodies.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

The guy who said smoking doesn't cause lung cancer died of lung cancer after smoking.

Now begins the difficult time again of not being allowed to be happy about the death of a person who wished death upon anyone he didn't like.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Jumpin said:
Rab said:

Yes AOC and others like her (the next Gen) are great examples of what can be done, their votes in government will make a difference 

I never once talked about getting results "now", you arguing with imagined shadows there I'm afraid

The working poor shouldn't have to wait forever or even a few decades because of the compromise strategy you so fondly endorse, maybe not "now" but much sooner than your Est. status quo could ever achieved based off it's track record so far, which is abysmal  

How has that compromise strategy worked in helping the poor or on gun control in a meaningful way, people would love to know, you have never addressed that point and I have asked repeatedly, I know you don't have an answer but I just want you to reflect on it ;)   

What is your alternate proposal? Because without compromise, things for minority interests can’t happen in a Democratic system if it is not in the interests of the majority of the representative bodies.

In many previous posts I have talked about Bernie's and the Progressives plan, it's not fully tested, but in a nut shell...

If a Senator isnt backing a Progressive idea like M4A and that vote is need to make a difference, all hell needs to be directed at them in the form of canvasing the public in their own state to inform the people of what their Senator is denying them for a better future, with the eventual aim to force them to change or push them out and replace them with another Dem, once this is achieved enough times future Senators will be very careful not go against the peoples needs/wishes

This is something that Progressive have already done in previous cycles, AOC being the most famous example, she destroyed and shocked a powerful incumbent Est. Dem by simply going to the people addressing real issues, if an issue is already popular like M4A and a Dem or Rep Senator stand in its way, they are a domino ready to be pushed over, basically putting the power back with in the People's area of influence and taking it away from the Senators  

Continuous Comprise with the Reps and "moderate" Dems have achieved next to nothing for the working poor in decades (one example), let alone popular issues like gun control, it's a failed strategy that few have openly talked about, it has failed working people, it makes no sense to continue on this way    



Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, including many others, slammed President Joe Biden for his dishonest response to the idea of student loan forgiveness during a CNN Town Hall

Progressives will put the spotlight on Biden so the people can see what kind of man he is (a compromised one?) 



Around the Network
Rab said:

Still avoiding to answer the question of why the working poor have suffered for decades under the Compromise Dem Est. (CDE), and why would you continue to use the same failed strategy ever again?

It is a massive oversimplification to summarize the entirety of several decades of politics in the single word "compromise", and the same can be said for boiling down everything that has occurred to simply the word "failure". Not every policy put forth over the last several decades can be blamed on compromise, and not every policy can be considered a failure. There are large scale negative trends such as a decline in unionization, a faltering of base level wages and increased wealth inequality, but we have also seen improvements such as a decline in poverty levels, improvements in food security, decreased unemployment and a decline in the uninsured/underinsured population. There is a lot to unpack there that can't really be touched when you are coming at it from such an over-simplified angle.

We can't have a conversation about much of anything if you keep yelling "Everything is bad because compromise". That is fundamentally a nonsensical assertion which is likely why most people here are refusing to engage with it.



sundin13 said:
Rab said:

Still avoiding to answer the question of why the working poor have suffered for decades under the Compromise Dem Est. (CDE), and why would you continue to use the same failed strategy ever again?

It is a massive oversimplification to summarize the entirety of several decades of politics in the single word "compromise", and the same can be said for boiling down everything that has occurred to simply the word "failure". Not every policy put forth over the last several decades can be blamed on compromise, and not every policy can be considered a failure. There are large scale negative trends such as a decline in unionization, a faltering of base level wages and increased wealth inequality, but we have also seen improvements such as a decline in poverty levels, improvements in food security, decreased unemployment and a decline in the uninsured/underinsured population. There is a lot to unpack there that can't really be touched when you are coming at it from such an over-simplified angle.

We can't have a conversation about much of anything if you keep yelling "Everything is bad because compromise". That is fundamentally a nonsensical assertion which is likely why most people here are refusing to engage with it.

It's "Compromise" which "Moderate" Dems love to use as a justification for their failed policies, the poor results over decades speaks for itself if you listen 

All the Progressives are saying is we should apply pressure in new ways, particularly empowering the people that are suffering the most, it's had some success



Rab said:
sundin13 said:

It is a massive oversimplification to summarize the entirety of several decades of politics in the single word "compromise", and the same can be said for boiling down everything that has occurred to simply the word "failure". Not every policy put forth over the last several decades can be blamed on compromise, and not every policy can be considered a failure. There are large scale negative trends such as a decline in unionization, a faltering of base level wages and increased wealth inequality, but we have also seen improvements such as a decline in poverty levels, improvements in food security, decreased unemployment and a decline in the uninsured/underinsured population. There is a lot to unpack there that can't really be touched when you are coming at it from such an over-simplified angle.

We can't have a conversation about much of anything if you keep yelling "Everything is bad because compromise". That is fundamentally a nonsensical assertion which is likely why most people here are refusing to engage with it.

It's "Compromise" which "Moderate" Dems love to use as a justification for their failed policies, the poor results over decades speaks for itself if you listen 

All the Progressives are saying is we should apply pressure in new ways, particularly empowering the people that are suffering the most, it's had some success

I have no idea what that first sentence is supposed to mean, or how any of this post is meant to respond to my argument.



There's never a response. It's essentially an automatic reply of "Moderate Dems are bad and their policies are a failure!" regardless of the question being asked.



sundin13 said:
Rab said:

It's "Compromise" which "Moderate" Dems love to use as a justification for their failed policies, the poor results over decades speaks for itself if you listen 

All the Progressives are saying is we should apply pressure in new ways, particularly empowering the people that are suffering the most, it's had some success

I have no idea what that first sentence is supposed to mean, or how any of this post is meant to respond to my argument.

Your gaslighting, although expected :/ 

You haven't been paying attention to what the Dems have used to justify their weak positions when ever asked why they haven't done more on M4A or why Gun Control isnt being put in place even though these issues and many many others have troubled people for decades, it nearly is always the "Compromise" excuse of the "moderate" Dems that is heard in some form or another, and it never works 

The Progressives have made great progress in getting many of these ideas like a minimum wage, Green New Deal, M4A, Prison reform, increasing Taxes on the Rich to be far more considered and mainstream conversation than almost any time in the past, with even Biden feeling like he has to do something for Progressive ideas, the pressure is working, when AOC kicked out that incumbent "Moderate" Dem, it sent shockwaves through the party and some soul searching 

You guys never address the issue that the compromise model of "Moderate" Dems have achieved virtually nothing in decades for working people regardless of all the nice Est. Dem promises

If the Est. Dems continue with these empty strategies and promises, in two years they will loose the Senate, an in 4 loose the election, people have had enough

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/07/6-facts-about-economic-inequality-in-the-u-s/

Last edited by Rab - on 17 February 2021