Politics
Out of context: Reply #30340
- Started
- Last post
- 33,769 Responses
- colin_s0
In terms of Democrats, Warren is one of the better ones. But she's still a democrat - and her economic policies that are 'progressive' seem just slightly to the left of neoliberal pro-globalist policies. Like she wants outright capitalism, just a more regulated version of it.
Obama shilled the same note for a hot minute but was obviously in deep with Wall Street even before his election and at this point I just won't trust a Democrat who claims to be for labor but avoids any association with socialism.
It's gonna be interesting to see how this election plays out-everyone thinks Trump has no chance at a second term but I could easily see the left fracturing between those who feel it's been dragged to the right of center and the older big-money liberals who want a Clinton-esque status quo and didn't learn from the last time around.
- (aka they can say "public option" in healthcare but so did Obama and we all know how that turned out)colin_s
- I think it's an unavoidable confrontation...I mean putting aside the capitalism vs. socialism thing the capture of the Democratic party by corrupt interests isyuekit
- a very real phenomenon. I mean look at how Chuck Schumer recently dismissed the idea of Medicare for all out of hand...he's supposed to be the leader of theyuekit
- "left" party and that policy is supported even by a majority of Republicans in polls lol.yuekit
- Unfortunately because Trump is such a shitshow it's allowed the corrupt establishment to temporarily look good in comparison.yuekit
- I think right now Trump has a verrrry good chance at a second mandate, the Dems have no one to oppose him. They need to start looking like they have a spine orzarkonite
- no one is going to get convinced that change = better.zarkonite
- And as far as socialism is concerned, that's going to depend on the new crop of representatives in the house and how well they fend for themselves.zarkonite
- Agree with yuekit. And I think Trump can win if the Dems don't get this one right. Beto is someone who can articulate what he stands for without being off-allthethings
- putting. Being genuine is the most important thing. It's why Warren would have real trouble.allthethings
- Not saying he's a bad guy but...seems to me the danger of a Beto O'Rourke candidacy is that he becomes an empty vessel for various interest groupsyuekit
- due to his lack of policy and track record. That could be good or bad depending on who's backing him I guess.yuekit
- Right now you see groups like "the Third Way" or whatever they're called which is pretty much a corporate donor group enthusiastic about him and I don't thinkyuekit
- it's unreasonable for people on the left to be somewhat skeptical.yuekit
- OTOH if he is backed by grass roots donors, and he comes out with strong policy, and puts someone like Sanders or Warren as VP, then I think it can work.yuekit
- No one votes on policy, it's a personality contest. Think of Reagan, W or Trump. None of them were more competent than their opponents... it's a show and youzarkonite
- have to give the best performance.zarkonite
- People make very superficial assessments but part of this assessment is, does this person stand for anything. I think it's safe to say that Trump had a moreyuekit
- coherent message than Clinton last time around. The wall, China, trade, etc. He did run on actual ideas -- they may have been stupid and bad ideas but it wasn'tyuekit
- only a personality contest. If a candidate like Beto is seen as standing for nothing he will get destroyed same as Clinton.yuekit