Robert Reich, Clinton Secretary of Labor, endorses Nina Turner for Ohio special election.

[progressoid]

Link to tweet

Early voting for @ninaturner’s election starts TODAY.

Who else loves this platform?

-Medicare For All
-A Green New Deal
-A $15 minimum wage
-A wealth tax
-Legalizing marijuana & expunging records

Spread the word.

If you live in Ohio’s 11th district, get out and VOTE!

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

1. Great response to this

Link to tweet

[ColinC]

5. I wonder if the idiot tweeter who posted that twitter response even read his tweet

Last edited Tue Jul 27, 2021, 10:20 PM - Edit history (1)

And if a personal attack on a political candidate negates an entire platform.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

11. Personal attack?

Is yours an irony post?

[ColinC]

18. No irony. I have nothing against personally attacking stupid idiots on

Twitter. That is, after all, where all the idiots flock.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

35. Woosh

That went straight over your head.

Welcome to ignore.

[George II]

38. You called a respected DUer an idiot, then doubled down on the guise of this being Twitter....

This is NOT Twitter.

[ColinC]

39. I was obviously referring to the Tweet shared, not the person sharing it

Or maybe it wasn't obvious. Apologies if I wasn't clear. The Tweet was stupid. The person sharing it was not.

[betsuni]

42. Why was it stupid?

Turner cannot tell the difference between the Democratic and Republican parties and she's running for office as a Democrat. How is it stupid to point this out as a problem?

[ColinC]

43. It is attacking Robert Reich more than it is attacking turner

And is saying nothing about policy, only using a years old quote as a purity test. It is not saying anything about the actual issues, or whether there is somebody who offers something better.

[Cha]

60. Robert Reich needs to be called Out for

supporting someone who Doesn't know the Difference between trump and now Pres Joe Biden..

No one is immune..

Sanders Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner Rips Biden: Choosing Between Him and Trump is Like Eating From a ‘Bowl of Sh*t’

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213815901

[betsuni]

81. That's not what a purity test is.

This isn't about policy.

[sheshe2]

16. Personal attack?

How so? They are her words.

[Sympthsical]

29. Oh, attacks on Democrats are allowed now?

Don't like a former Democratic cabinet official's opinion, post that he must be on drugs?

I'm sure this will be hidden. Just like all the attacks on AOC.

No, I'm totally kidding. It's open season on certain Democrats, or those with Wrong Thinking.

Don't bash Democrats should be reworked into, "Don't bash moderate Democrats! Attacking progressive Democrats is ok."

Seems to be how it works around here.

Just want to point it out for the inevitable hypocrisy later, when someone says something vaguely critical of a moderate. The drama that will ensue. Arrange the couches.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

36. Oh please

Nina Turner is not a Democrat. Pretty telling that you're okay with her calling Joe Biden a bowl of shit.

[Sympthsical]

49. You posted an attack on Robert Reich

Who is an admired and respected Democrat in good standing.

No gas-lighting, please. We are not in Victorian London.

[George II]

50. Reich had philosophical differences with President Clinton, and resigned to "spend more time....

....with his sons."

I didn't "attack" Reich, but you can call it what you want. No "gas-lighting" involved.

[Sympthsical]

53. There ya go

I knew you had it in you. Never disappoints.

[George II]

56. Happy to oblige. Interesting you had no comment about the content of my post. Hmmmmm.

[Sympthsical]

91. There wasn't any content

Just a run around non-sequitur intended to exhaust the responder with circles resulting in 10-15 post subthreads. As I work all day, it's gonna be a hard pass for me, dawg.

And seeing how the rest of the thread is going. I have one response.

[Nixie]

94. Speaking of exhausting people, maybe try explaining Nina's

bowl of shit comment about voting for Biden. That Tweet seemed to indicate Reich had poor judgment if he didn’t consider Nina’s vile comment about voting for the Democrat. Wasn’t the Tweet correct in that assessment?

[George II]

58. And yet you have not comment about the content, just a snarky insult. Thanks!

[Nixie]

89. Speaking of having things in you...were you here to see

the attacks from the brand builders on “establishment” Dems?

It looks to me that others reserve their right to “critique” as those brand builders have bestowed upon themselves.

[Sympthsical]

92. I never said establishment Dems are on drugs

Which is the point I'm addressing. An attack was posted against Reich saying such.

I do enjoy how literally no one is addressing the point. Just talking in circles and going, "Squirrel!"

You know, I think I'll keep buying the can of Folger's from Costco for $9.69. It's perfectly decent, lasts a month, and doesn't cost nearly as much as what I had been buying and grinding myself. Toss in some half and half and splenda, and it's perfectly acceptable.

Since the theme of almost all of the replies to me are non-sequitur, I figured I'd do my bit. Also just as useful information. Call it a gift.

[Nixie]

93. Yet more hypocrisy, but you that's all you have, it seems.

Don’t be bitter because the reality-based world/voters didn’t accept the BS. Just accept that you were beaten at the ballot box and there really isn’t a reason to prolong the reality twisting.

[Sympthsical]

95. Was Reich up for election?

And what is my hypocrisy? Be specific. Can't just fling any ole word out there without evidence of such. So far you have, "Some people said," which isn't me.

I honestly do not care if Turner wins or not. Not my district, not my circus. I'm just rubbernecking the collective aneurysm in response to her. It's so disproportionate to the actual importance of the thing.

I am entertained as all get out.

[Nixie]

100. I think I'm seeing your problem here. Make it easy on yourself and just admit that

the Tweet you responded to was just showing Nina's own words about voting for bowls of shit. You can also explain how that helps get Democrats elected.

Everything else sounds like your personal grievances that the brand builder's don't have a one-way ticket to "critique" and all your grievances sound familiar, actually.

[betsuni]

55. He said President Obama "allowed powerful interests to cash in" "about $16 billion a year"

paid to the drug industry. The rule of always assuming malice and corruption on the part of Democrats.

[Cha]

62. Ikr.. as I previously posted.. Not everyone

thinks Reich is all that.

When I saw the title of the OP.. I thought.. Of course he does.

they have no shame..

Sanders Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner Rips Biden: Choosing Between Him and Trump is Like Eating From a ‘Bowl of Sh*t’

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213815901

[Cha]

61. Reich deserves to be called Out for

supporting someone who doesn't know the difference between trump and now Pres Joe Biden. And Pushes 3rd party Voting like Turner does.

Not everyone thinks RR is all that.

Sanders Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner Rips Biden: Choosing Between Him and Trump is Like Eating From a ‘Bowl of Sh*t’

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213815901

[George II]

44. Turner? Democrat? Maybe you should read the announcement by The People's Party, the party....

....that she co-founded:

The People’s Party isn’t on the ballot in Ohio yet so she will have to run as a Democrat, but.....

https://peoplesparty.org/nina-turner-congress/

[ColinC]

45. It was attacking Robert reich

A well respected member of Clinton's cabinet and lifelong democrat

[Sympthsical]

48. Robert Reich is a Democrat in good standing

At least, last that I checked.

Maybe that's magically changed now that he's exhibiting Wrong Think.

I'm sure you will be the first to make it known.

[Cha]

63. So? Not everyone thinks Reich is all that.. he

can be called out for supporting this..

Sanders Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner Rips Biden: Choosing Between Him and Trump is Like Eating From a ‘Bowl of Sh*t’

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213815901

[Sympthsical]

65. We're not supposed to attack Democrats here

Reich is one, in good standing.

Your response is just a non-sequitur. You didn't address my post at all.

[Cha]

66. We Can Call Out Reich.

[Sympthsical]

67. Saying he's on drugs?

Man, there are new definitions of "bashing a Democrat" everyday that just get wiped away as necessary.

So bash some Democrats. As needed.

I mean, I know that's kind of how it actually works here vs. the written rules. I just like to note the hypocrisy when it's so obvious.

Y'all are ok with bashing Dems, if it's in service.

Noted.

[Cha]

68. If we disagree with him we can say so..

Last edited Wed Jul 28, 2021, 01:49 AM - Edit history (1)

I would never personally say that about anyone.. people can be stupid without being on "drugs".

[betsuni]

70. Imagine that criticizing someone running for office as a Democrat calling the leader of the party

excrement (twice!) is a "purity test" but someone wondering why a smart guy like Reich thinks this is completely fine is a grave personal attack (OMG HOW DARE ANYONE ACCUSE SOMEONE OF USING LEGAL DRUGS IT IS A TRAVESTY).

[Cha]

71. Excellent Point.. TY! Ikr.. enough

of the Twilight Zone!

[Sympthsical]

107. Yet the drug thing is what I responded to

I'm not the one twisting around to defend it.

But there's a nice little group doing so.

I don't see any "Hey guys, don't bash Democrats that way. Criticize them, sure. But we don't need that crap here."

People could've said that. They didn't. Instead y'all moved to defend it, claim it's no big deal, or just generally ignore it.

So curious, so curious.

I mean, I know it's obvious disingenuousness to excuse away why Left-bashing is ok. I'm just poking to see how hilarious the rationalizations can get for why bashing some Democrats is ok. The indignant stuff is fun, too.

I'm not taking this even slightly seriously. I just got bored and decided to flick at the prolific, daily, tiresome-ages-ago Left-bashing. And the result was precisely as imagined.

[Cha]

109. Do we need Turner saying this about now Democratic Pres Biden?

Sanders Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner Rips Biden: Choosing Between Him and Trump is Like Eating From a ‘Bowl of Sh*t’

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213815901

[George II]

96. Who said anyone was on drugs? I search the entire thread - the only references to drugs...

...was by you and by another poster referring to the drug industry.

[Sympthsical]

106. Someone retweeted a post

Asking if Reich was taking edibles. It's literally the post I initially responded to.

There are tools in browsers that enable +200% and things if type is too small.

Though it's a huge honkin' picture.

[LanternWaste]

124. Keep moving those goalposts.

I think someone's vying for a groundskeeper job at the local stadium.

Good luck!

[Sympthsical]

127. And there's the bingo

I feel like there are flash cards laying around somewhere. They have words, like gaslighting, hypocrisy, strawman, fallacy, goalposts.

But someone didn't put the definitions on the back.

So people know the words, but not the music. But if you use them, you've scored points in the argument somehow.

I'll just mark down another check on the side of ok with bashing a Democrat if it serves an anti-Left purpose.

This list so far is not a great look.

Oh! BTW. Found the best shawarma I've ever had today. Seriously. I don't often refer to food as orgasmic, but here we are. And it's a local deli to boot. I could only take a bite, as I'm doing a whole keto thing at present, but it was crazy delicious. So jealous my partner gets to eat the whole thing for dinner. I get ground turkey mixed with kale salad.

Just thought I'd share. The theme in this thread seems to be, "Responses that have nothing to do with anything," so I figured I'd go all in.

Maybe we can post recipes! This did all start with edibles, after all.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

146. Watch this ad see what you think about the use of drugs

This ad is so bad that I am not sure if this ad is really for Nina

Link to tweet

[Me.]

149. Of Course WE Can

Obviously Nina Turner thinks so but when we do it we disagree and don't offer up her menu items

[NurseJackie]

72. Ridiculous!

65. We're not supposed to attack Democrats here
Reich is one, in good standing.

Ridiculous! He's a pundit. He's an economist, professor, author, and political commentator... that's all. He holds no elected office as a Democrat.

Your response is just a non-sequitur.

Trying to silence others by defending Reich in this way is a strawman.



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

[progressoid]

101. I like your definition!

In order to be a Democrat in good standing you have to hold an elected office as a Democrat! That really narrows down the field. In fact it eliminates nearly everyone including most of us here on Democratic Underground.

Even being an economist, professor, author, political commentator, pundit and the Secy of Labor for one of the most popular Democratic Presidents doesn't matter. He didn't hold an elected office so never mind.

[NurseJackie]

103. That's exactly right.

In order to be a Democrat in good standing you have to hold an elected office as a Democrat!

No, that's not true. And you know perfectly well that's not what I said. In the context of this subthread, it cannot be rationally argued that Reich is entitled to the same deference on DU as an elected Democrat would be.

That really narrows down the field. In fact it eliminates nearly everyone including most of us here on Democratic Underground.

Nope... it's just a ridiculous interpretation put forth as an obvious strawman argument. Spare me.

Even being an economist, professor, author, political commentator, pundit and the Secy of Labor for one of the most popular Democratic Presidents doesn't matter. He didn't hold an elected office so never mind.

Yes, thank you! That's exactly right. Because he's not an elected representative who currently holds office, he does not qualify for any sort of extra protection when it comes to being called-out or criticized.

I hope this clears things up for you. Have a nice day!

[progressoid]

105. In deference to an elected Democrat, I give you Jamie Raskin.

Link to tweet

[NurseJackie]

108. Thanks.

My opinion of him has declined.

[George II]

102. He's also on the Board of Directors of the now reactivated Sanders Institute.

[NurseJackie]

104. I never liked him. But, at least he's not calling Democrats "corporate whores" or "Coastal-Elites"...

I never liked him. But, at least he's not calling Democrats "corporate whores" or "Coastal-Elites"… or comparing our comparing President Biden to a "BOWL OF SHIT".

[Nixie]

116. +++, of course we know that's what these tangents

are always about —a way to browbeat Democrats into silence for their one-sided “critiques.”

[George II]

88. Having a difference of opinion with a Democrat isn't "attacking" him/her. On the other hand....

....you're here apparently supporting a "Democrat" that called our Presidential nominee (and now President) a half bowl of shit and followed that up with another comment calling him a FULL bowl of shit.

So what's this about "attacking Democrats"?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

145. This ad is so bad that it made me laughed

Is Reich trying to help Brown?

Link to tweet

[Budi]

150. Oh my... sure, that'll help.

[Demsrule86]

77. I don't care for him and haven't for quite a while.

This endorsement only strengthens this opinion. The Democratic Party is the only way to combat the right-wing. Those who undermine our party as Nina Turner has done before and also this year with deceptive advertisements are not worthy of our support in a primary. Ms. Turner is not a Democrat and has called out a Democratic president.

[George II]

83. What constitutes "good standing"?

[betsuni]

84. Evidently, saying something makes it true.

[lapucelle]

139. Nina Turner was a Democratic superdelegate when she went all in for Jill Stein in 2016.

Not only was she a Democrat in good standing in the years 2015-2020, some would also argue that she was a a party insider. Nina never abrogated her standing and status as Democratic Party superdelegate. She never resigned. She waited for her five year term to expire.

Nina was a Democrat in good standing and a putative party insider with superdelegate status when she supported Jill Stein and, not only refused to endorse Joe Biden, but also compared him on the record to a bowl of shit.

I guess that to some that's perfectly OK because nothing should "magically" change when people "exhibit Wrong Think".

However, the argument can be made that what Nina did during the general election season of the last two presidential cycles is just plain disgusting and an indication of bad judgement and bitter intransigence that rises to the level of disqualification.

[Sympthsical]

140. I'm discussing Reich, not Turner

I don't care much about Turner at all. I'm discussing attacking Reich. I don't get why every response has to go "Squirrel!" and start talking about Turner.

Unless it's an attempt at changing the topic because there is no response (this week in Things That Are Duh)

Posting here asking if Reich is on drugs should be unacceptable. No Dem bashing, right?

If bashing a Dem is ok because you don't like the Dem, people should just say so. But these endless sub-threads talking around it are such a waste of time. I mean, I think they're hilarious, because I know the point - reserve the right to Dem-bash when it's the Left while still reserving the ability to shriek murder whenever a moderate is even lightly criticized.

It's a silly and obvious game being played. Everyone sees it.

Personally, I can't wait for the attacks on Jamie Raskin and being told everything he ever did wrong in his life. But, you know, on the sly just tangentially enough for deniability. We all know that shit's in the mail.

[lapucelle]

141. You can't wait for attacks on Raskin? Were you outraged that the CBC was called "petty & confused"?

Here's the point: There's nothing wrong with questioning the fitness of any candidate who supported a third party spoiler in 2016 and who then refused to endorse the 2020 Democratic nominee, calling him comparable to a bowl of shit.

And while there's nothing wrong with commenting on the wisdom of endorsing such a candidate, sharing jokey tweets about edibles impacting judgement should probably be avoided. Frankly, characterizing the the Congressional Black Caucus as "petty and confused" on DU is far more troubling.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

[Demsrule86]

74. Nina Turner is not a Democrat first of all and secondly, I don't care what platform she supports...

one that has no chance in any case. She is running on opposing a Democratic president...thus she should not be our candidate. I live in this district and will vote for Shontel Brown. I heard all I needed to hear from Ms. Turner in 16,20 and most recently with mailing attacking our Democratic president.

[helpisontheway]

76. Nina Turner is a democrat? 😮 News to me..every time I see her she is bashing democrats. Nt

[Nixie]

90. How ironic that you are concerned about hypocrisy.

You seem to be okay with building a brand around “critiquing” of “moderates,” but are upset that it’s not a one-way street.

[Arazi]

47. 6 minutes. Winning!

[Doremus]

2. Who else loves this platform?

I do!

-Medicare For All
-A Green New Deal
-A $15 minimum wage
-A wealth tax
-Legalizing marijuana & expunging records

What's not to love?

[Blue_true]

3. What's not to love?

Nina Turner.

Pretty much 98% of democrats are 100% for every item you listed, we don’t need a person like Nina distracting from the efforts to get those items into law.

[ColinC]

6. Then why don't 98% of Democrats run on that platform?

[Blue_true]

7. Because they are not empty grandstanders.

Getting policy done always is better than “talking” about progress, but doing nothing concrete to make it possible.

[ColinC]

9. No. Getting policy done always starts with an intention to do so.

Folks who have stated they are against those proposal aren't lying, and they don't want it done. If you want those things to happen you need to vote for people that support it.

[Blue_true]

12. So, in your world, getting policy into law never involved thinking about doing so.

I really have to remember that one.

[ColinC]

19. No. In my world getting policy into law requires an intention to do so

And an acknowledgement that it is possible. Few politicians have yet to even do that, yet you are jumping to the conclusion that those very politicians who do not state an intention to do it, are the best ones to get it done. I disagree.

[Blue_true]

24. The politicians that you say haven't done anything are the only

people that have made progress possible over the last 61 years.

Senator Sanders talks about wonderful things, but other than providing a vote to bills be Democrats to put those items into law, his record is pretty thin.

Nina Turner was in the Ohio Senate representing the districts that she wants to represent in Congress. She talks about other politicians doing nothing for those districts, what the hell did she do during her years in the Ohio Capitol? She brings nothing to the table, Shontel Brown does.

[ColinC]

25. I never said any politicians have done nothing

They have not however done the following, nor have many of them stated a position endorsing the following:
-Medicare For All
-A Green New Deal
-A $15 minimum wage
-A wealth tax
-Legalizing marijuana & expunging records

In fact many have come out entirely opposing those things. Not sure how you expect to get those done when the people you say can get those done are openly against them.

[Blue_true]

28. Endorsing something is not the same as getting those items into law.

Hourly wages, for example, are a tough issue. Bigger companies with good revenue flow can and should be made to pay higher wages. Small companies that are barely scraping by likely can’t pay the higher wages. It is a tough issue, you don’t want business owners skipping out on paying higher wages, so some method has to be done to evaluate the wages that they are paying against net profits and penalizing them if they are pulling tricks to avoid paying higher wages.

[ColinC]

30. Agreed. But you cannot get anything into law without an intention to do so

If the opposite was true, we would already have the following:


-Medicare For All
-A Green New Deal
-A $15 minimum wage
-A wealth tax
-Legalizing marijuana & expunging records

We do not, however have any of the above items passed into law. My argument is because despite many times having a trifecta in the federal legislature and executive, those I'm control of either party did not prioritize those items. They did some great things, I agree. But not those things. If we want those things to happen, we need to elect people with a stated desire to make it happen. That is step one. But many steps follow which allude to the point you are making. My point however is that you cannot expect the later steps without first getting he first one.

[MrsCoffee]

87. Have you even heard of Shontel Brown?

https://shontelbrown.com/priorities/

If you had, you would realize how ridiculous your posts in this thread are.

[sheshe2]

118. Thank you, MrsCoffee!

I will work with the Biden-Harris Administration to pass a high-quality public option that will lower costs, drive down prescription drug costs, and expand coverage to achieve universal health care. I believe a public option that President Biden supports is the fastest and most immediate mechanism to get there. I would vote for Medicare for All if it came to the House floor.

snip

need to pass legislation that allows Medicare to negotiate lower prescription drug costs, end big drug companies’ tax breaks for advertising, and end backroom deals like “pay for delay,” which limits competition from generic drugs and drives up our costs as patients.

My work with First Year Cleveland inspired me to write and pass landmark legislation declaring racism a public health crisis in Cuyahoga County. But we have a lot more work to do, as racial disparities in health care have only been exacerbated during the pandemic. I am glad that the Biden-Harris Administration is prioritizing health equity and will continue to work for equitable distribution of COVID relief.

So much MORE at your link.

[betsuni]

31. Emotional "Fighting for" and "taking on."

Myth of the bully pulpit, myth of "the will of the people" (the 99% all agree with the populist slogans and are just waiting for the right progressive leaders, will then rally against the 1% and demand action -- the revolution). Reich provides as evidence four progressive changes Teddy Roosevelt supposedly got done using the bully pulpit, but he's wrong. Disparages "dealmakers-in-chief" (the only way anything gets done). Assumption of bad intentions on Democrats' part, they don't want anything progressive.

[Blue_true]

41. The people that believe that the greater populace will magically embrace change

are deluding themselves. Look at the ACA , a lot of the people who were virulently opposed to it now don’t want to see it go away. Sometimes you have to get what is possible into law and then let people see how well the change works for them.

Societal progress has been incremental, some people hate that term, but that is a fact. Our worst setbacks have come when people sat at home demanding miracle changes and we got Reagan, Bush II and Trump into office, not to mention republican congresses.

[betsuni]

51. Delusional is right.

The reason Americans are more open to government involvement in health care is because they got used to the ACA. Makes me mad when people take credit for "pushing Democrats to the Left" -- universal health care being their new radical idea that Democrats had never heard of before. As if a public option wasn't included in the ACA version that passed in the House, as if Hillary didn't run on a public option and Medicare at 55. As if Democrats haven't been saying that health care is a right and not a privilege from the '60s. As if one Medicare for All bill is the only possible way to provide health care for Americans and if you don't agree you're a corrupt neoliberal corporate shill for the insurance industry and Big Pharma.

Same thing with a $15 minimum wage. Fight for Fifteen began in 2012, places like Seattle did it, people could see that the economy didn't collapse. People took credit for that being their new radical idea, too. Legalized marijuana. Green energy. Same sex marriage. Many things. People saw civilization didn't end. Incremental change as usual. Don't know what the hell these populist revolution people are talking about when they claim to be the only progressives and things about transformation and how terrible incrementalism is. At least recently disparaging incrementalism as evil isn't as fashionable as it was a few years ago.

[Blue_true]

131. You capture my thought processes almost exactly.

The great Senator Ted Kennedy turned dow a very good health care proposal from Nixon because he felt it didn’t go far enough, he regretted that later in life and once opined that he should have taken it then moved forward from there.

It enrages me when people claim that “establishment” Democrats have gotten nothing done. I have knowledge of living through the post civil rights years, while things are not where I as a Democrat want them, they are a LOT better than they were in 1985.

[ColinC]

59. Thing is, what is possible can also seem delusional

Medicare is only one of tons of examples that's seemed delusional until we got it, and became a third rail issue. The NHS in the UK also was delusional, and the PM even lost his seat shortly after it was passed. But it is one of the most popular initiatives in that country to this day.

Union rights, a minimum wage, 99% of the New Deal were also alleged to be deluded pie in the sky proposals.... Until it happened and became among the most popular initiatives to date.

[betsuni]

69. FDR compromised whenever it moved his agenda forward. When he took office the Great Depression

had gone on for four years. The American people demanded action. Opposing the New Deal would've been political suicide (those were the days when Republicans could be voted out of office). He had very large Democratic majorities in Congress. FDR was a wealthy elite establishment liberal Democratic capitalist. Incrementalism and being "dealmaker-in-chief" (as Reich said Hillary would be and that was bad) for the win!

[Blue_true]

133. The NHS in Britain came about as a result of the devastation of WWII.

Please don’t use that as an example, the conditions for it’s origins aren’t ones that we will see unless we have another civil war. A better comparison is Canada, healthcare system, which was INCREMENTALLY set up (some provinces wanted nothing to do with it, so provinces that did were allowed to go ahead, they plan worked so well that balking provinces joined in).

The original Medicare was a pretty bare bones program, it was improved in the years after it’s passage and even after Bush II’s changes, the modern Medicare is far superior to what was originally passed.

Social Security passed under FDR was bare bones and didn’t not truly cover African Americans. The program was greatly improved after passage.

Do you have ANY idea of how long it took to get rights for workers, or the 40 hour workweek? Well, worker rights was a fight that went on for like 100+ years, with incremental improvements. The 40 hour workweek became more popular when industrialists like George Westinghouse implemented giving their workers two days off - those operations were productive and provided evidence that working people’s asses off was counter-productive.

The New Deal programs were a response done to pull the country out of the shithole called the Great Depression. Again, you use a standard that doesn’t match what we have today. Even with large income inequality in society, if we try to ram through poorly throughout change we are going to fail badly and most likely set progress back for many years.

[betsuni]

136. +1

[Demsrule86]

78. The platform Reich and I suppose Turner support is not going to be acted into law. They both

object to doing it in stages...all our nothing for them...and we get nothing with this sort of attitude.

[Blue_true]

134. Some of us see what you point out clearly.

We have LIVED through it. I really get enraged when people insist that an approach which has yielded great benefits for society is useless.

[progressoid]

8. Indeed.

We need to embrace our liberalness.

[leftstreet]

13. They do

They always run on universal healthcare, saving the planet, raising wages, taxing the rich

[jalan48]

27. $$$$

[George II]

54. Because 98% of Democrats run on platforms that are realistic and achievable.

[ColinC]

57. Marijuana is legalized in some form in 48/50 states

This includes the vast majority of republican states. Meanwhile, it remains equivalent to cocaine at the federal level. I don't see that as something that is unrealistic and unachievable, personally if almost every state was able to do it.

[Voltaire2]

112. by the time we get around to upping the min wage to 15

15/hr will be equivalent to 7.25.

Somehow we've bought the theory that we shouldn't even try to go big.

[George II]

119. A number of reasons. I personally don't agree with two of those items, I'm sure other Democrats....

....don't agree with one, two, or even more.

I agree more with the platform of the Democratic Party, which was developed by dozens of Democrats and ratified by thousands of Democrats at our convention last year.

[Celerity]

20. Absolutely concede your point about Turner as a valid argument, BUT I profoundly dispute

Pretty much 98% of democrats are 100% for every item you listed

the poster you replied to listed these items:



I contend that not only do NONE of them singularly have anywhere near 98% Democratic congressional support

BUT

some may not even have majority (50%+1) support in the Senate Democratic caucus

the first 2 would be the most likely candidates for that

Try pushing the Green New Deal and/or MFA here on DU and you will will get massive pushback (and you would also get massive push back in the Congressional Dem Caucus).

Same for the wealth tax, just to a smaller level here and in Congress.

There are even people here (and most definitely in the Dem Caucus) who are vehemently opposed to a 15 USD PH minimum wage and/or legalisation of weed. Biden himself is absolutely against legalisation, has been for 50 years or so.

Hell, not only is MFA strongly opposed by many, BUT, as I have said since I joined DU, even if we had 55 or so Dem Senators, the Public Option (that I absolutely support myself) would not pass. Even if there was no filibuster, I think for sure there are a good handful of Dem Senators against the Public Option period. Trillions in profits at stake.

[Autumn]

17. Me! That's what we all need, the only way to get it is to vote for people who support that platform.

[Doremus]

22. Exactly!

[George II]

46. What platform is that? Certainly not the Democratic National Committee platform, on which Biden ran.

Here is the platform on which Democrats ran:

https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/

[skylucy]

4. I don't really have a problem with the platform. I've got a BIG problem with the messenger.

[madaboutharry]

14. I don't get it.

I don’t understand why she has a single endorsement. She is a divisive and alienating person. And she admits she isn’t a Democrat.

[empedocles]

15. Yes

[Doremus]

21. You don't understand why she has a single endorsement?

She has MANY endorsements. Do you live in the 11th district? Are you famiiar with Nina in her previous roles?

She is a defender of average Americans. She fights for issues that help us and against powerful monied interests. She wants to be a congresswoman so she can have a greater opportunity to do both.

Here is her platform:

-Medicare For All
-A Green New Deal
-A $15 minimum wage
-A wealth tax
-Legalizing marijuana & expunging records

Do you disagree with any of it? What is Shontel's platform? I assume you know.

[George II]

52. "Greater opportunity to do both"?

[Demsrule86]

79. I live in the 11th district and I am not impressed with Ms. Turner who is no longer a Democrat and

failed to support our last Presidential nominees. I have not idea why any Democrat would endorse her.

[Doremus]

82. Because I've been very happy with her representation in the past

She has fire in her gut to stand up for people who have little voice. She doesn’t go along to get along; she ruffles feathers if necessary.

Shontel? She’s another politician, and a green one at that.

[betsuni]

85. Nina is a politician, not a green one. Establishment.

Senator, superdelegate, lobbyist, senior staff of two presidential campaigns, Our Revolution, the Peoples's Party,. Etc. Saying "working class" and "grassroots" and slogans doesn't mean anything.

[Doremus]

132. Yes she is

Of course she’s a politician. With a fine track record of fighting for issues that benefit the middle and lower classes.

What does shontel stand for? It’s difficult to tell, given her scant experience, but there are a few indications. She’s voted against $15 minimum wage. And she has voted to award her boyfriends company millions of dollars of county contracts.

Oh, and she is heavily backed by DMFI pac which i find worrisome given the number of wealthy repukes who support that group.

[sheshe2]

120. Yes it was posted here.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215670338#post87

And she actually accomplished things during her time in office. Take the time to read it all, she fleshes hers out and does not just use slogans.

She doesn't just talk, she takes action.

[PortTack]

23. This ....she's nothing but trouble..has already proven that

What she said about HRC, Biden, voted for jill stein when she didn’t get her way..what’s not to love?

[Hortensis]

26. Robert Reich also endorsed Sanders' (forerunner to tRump's) claims

in 2016 that dozens of state Democratic parties were stealing their primary nomination, and thus later the election, from him. Whatever Reich's reasons were for approving this ruthless sabotage of the Democratic Party and betrayal of the trust of those who believed him, I emphatically do not endorse them.

Reich's endorsement of Sanders was also effectively an endorsement of Sanders' (forerunner to tRump's) frequent (shocking!) promise to misuse superdelegate power to subvert the nomination to himself if the expected very large majority of Democrats voted for Hillary. (Yeah, I know. tRump's notes must mostly have been about what did not work.)

And here we are with Reich's endorsement of Turner., effectively an endorsement of her throwing of progressivism itself under the bus in 2016. Not enough to refuse to vote Democratic herself, she was on national TV and the internet trying to persuade others to turn against us. And thus helped throw the nation to anti-government Republicans rabidly determined to permanently eliminate the evils of progressivism in progressive, and with them all progressive programs.

I do not endorse Reich's morals, and certainly not his judgement.

[betsuni]

32. Yes, not surprising.

[Cha]

64. Yeah.. shite like this is why I do Not

like Reich and would actually expect him to endorse someone who doesn't know the difference..

Sanders Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner Rips Biden: Choosing Between Him and Trump is Like Eating From a ‘Bowl of Sh*t’

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213815901

[Nixie]

147. Yup! Bernie is his most recent political affiliation ,

so the title should reflect that. They are just using the Clinton name in the title to give him credibility.

[Hortensis]

148. :) The Clinton name just makes me want to take a stick to the lot of

those who worked to defeat Democrats in 2016. No amount of high-sounding rhetoric will ever make me forget what it's trying to disguise or believe there isn't something seriously whacked about those who'd throw their own goals under the Republican bus. (!)

[JohnSJ]

33. Unlike what Turner did in 2016, refusing to vote for the Democratic nominee, if Turner wins her

primary, Democrats will vote for her against the Republican in the general

It is shameful that she has no regrets for comparing the Democratic President to a bowl of S**t,
and even sadder that most of her supporters have no problem with that characterization

Very sad indeed

[NurseJackie]

73. That would be a shame, wouldn't it?

[JohnSJ]

80. exactly Jackie

[Uncle Joe]

34. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread progressoid.

[Progressive Jones]

40. Just Say No To Nina. Platform good; "bowl of shit" comment bad. We don't need whackos. nt

[Voltaire2]

113. so one unfortunate comment should disqualify a politician?

[sheshe2]

121. Frankly it is the whole package and not one comment.

She supported Jill Stein and campaigned for her. She voted third party. She has stated clearly that she is not a Democrat.

[betsuni]

122. Said it twice. She thinks both parties are the same. Why she voted for Jill Stein.

Why she wanted to run for office as a third party candidate but couldn't so had to run as a Democrat. She's been saying the same things for the years. This is not news.

To "The Atlantic" she said "You have a bowl of shit in front of you, and all you've got to do is eat half of it instead of the whole thing. It's still shit."

In another interview she said, "You've got two bowls of shit in front of you. And you've got to pick one. That's the situation we're in."

[helpisontheway]

75. 🤢nt

[Nanjeanne]

86. Jamie Raskin just endorsed Turner as well.

Link to tweet

?s=21

[progressoid]

97. Nice.

Has that been posted as an OP?

[bigtree]

98. this kind of support makes her critics look petty and confused

...working to tear down a Democratic candidate with support from mainstream Democratic leaders in Congress while, at the same time, criticizing her for criticizing the party.

[Cha]

110. No, you're Wrong.. this is what is "petty and conffused"..

Sanders Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner Rips Biden: Choosing Between Him and Trump is Like Eating From a ‘Bowl of Sh*t’

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213815901

[George II]

111. She did more than criticize the Democratic Party...

For one, running as a Democrat is her second choice, and she's doing it reluctantly:

"It’s official! Sen. Nina Turner is running for Congress. She’s running for the seat vacated by Rep. Marcia Fudge, who Joe Biden has chosen as secretary of Housing and Urban Development. The People’s Party isn’t on the ballot in Ohio yet so she will have to run as a Democrat"

https://peoplesparty.org/nina-turner-congress/

A couple of other beauts:

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Just_Vote_Dem]

125. Ugh. That's horrible

She would never get my vote in a primary.

[Me.]

114. Does THat Include Rep. Clyburn?

Petty and confused?

[sheshe2]

123. Ouch.

That's gotta sting.

[George II]

126. You mean the guy who Mike called "incredibly stupid" and Turner nodded in agreement and said....

...."preach it!"?

[Me.]

130. Talk About Stupid...

They are the gift that keeps on giving

[NurseJackie]

115. So you think the Congressional Black Caucus is "petty and confused"?

Puh-leeze! GMAFB!

[JohnSJ]

117. Refusing to vote for the Democratic nominee in 2016, and encouraging others to do the same

is not an example of her criticizing the party, it is an example of a supposed progressive helping trump

[betsuni]

129. Reich's been a Bernie Sanders supporter for years. This doesn't make anybody look like anything.

Nothing new. He believes in the Bernie Sanders revolution, same as Turner (who wanted to run as a People's Party candidate). From an op-ed Reich wrote in 2016, what he wanted to see in the future:

"Millions who called themselves conservative and Tea Partiers joined with millions who called themselves liberals and progressives. ... The People's Party won the U.S. presidency and a majority of both houses of Congress in 2020."

All who believe in the revolution believe the working class is unified by economic ideology. Tea Partiers/Trump voters are socialists, they just don't know it yet. The establishment will do anything to stop the coming working class revolution. Once the people understand (as Sanders said, you have to go out into Trumpland and explain it to them) they will stop voting against their economic interest and join the 99% against the 1%. Done.

This is wrong, obviously. But at least Reich doesn't insult Democrats.

[lapucelle]

138. Robert Reich finally endorsing Nina makes the Congressional Black Caucus look petty and confused?

That seems to imply that Jim Clyburn needs to have things 'splained to him. Really?

You know what looks "petty and confused"? Ignoring Robert Reich's plea to "fight like hell" for the Democratic general election candidate in 2016.

This was Reich's take on embittered partisans after the 2020 general election:

Elections usually end with losing candidates congratulating winners and graciously accepting defeat. They thereby demonstrate their commitment to the democratic system over the particular outcome they fought to achieve.

Apparently there will be no graciousness from Trump and his allies, and no concession from Trump.

They don't want America to heal. They don't want Americans to come together. They'd evidently prefer continuous warfare because that's the only way they think they can win.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

142. Are you sure that Nina will caucus with the Democrats?

Nina was founder of the People's Party and they seem to think that Nina will be their representative

Link to tweet

[Devil Child]

99. Excellent! n/t

[lapucelle]

135. Why did Reich sit on the fence so long? He and former superdelegate Nina worked together

on both of the junior senator from Vermont's presidential bids, so they had a working relationship for at least four to five years. I wonder if it has anything to do with Nina not following Reich's advice to "work like hell" for the 2016 Democratic nominee.

[betsuni]

137. I snort every time I remember the "They tried to seduce us with donuts and water" moment.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

143. This ad is very effective

Link to tweet

[Cha]

144. Excellent.. Rt TY!