What would have/make/allow politically astute people ...

[1StrongBlackMan]

(or, anyone that includes real life's experience to inform their opinions) think that, in a political environment that is (roughly) evenly divided between liberal and conservatives/Democrats and republicans, one can advance any political initiative/agenda based the idea that one side gets something (everything) and the other side gets nothing?

Isn't that a formula for stagnation, i.e., getting nothing done?

[jwirr]

1. It is and since that is the Rs goal they are successful at what they think their job is. Their base

applauds them for obstruction while we are furious. While more people support this because of their bigotry I think this kind of obstruction will continue as long as it works for the R corporations.

[RobertEarl]

11. Indeed

It works for them.

The OP forgot a whole third of the public - the independents. In my mind what the party needs to do is convince them of the way the republicans go about governing. To start with H> needs to run, run, run, as a Democratic party member, first and foremost. I doubt her big donors would approve, tho.

[guillaumeb]

2. I think your formula is partly correct.

When you describe a country that is &quot roughly) evenly divided..." my contention would be that people are generally more liberal than conservative in their unlabeled opinions. I use the word unlabeled because many polls show that people are turned away from the word liberal. The GOP has been framing the word liberal as a bad thing since the Nixon Presidency.

There is polling to show that more people disapprove of "Obamacare" than "The Affordable Care Act". This shows the success of the GOP's branding and how it affects perceptions.

From a link:
Gallup’s test went like this: Some people were asked whether they approved of the Affordable Care Act that had been signed into law by Obama. Some were simply asked if they liked the 2010 law that had changed the US health system. A third variant asked if respondents liked “Obamacare.” A fourth asked if they liked the “Affordable Care Act,” with no mention of Obama at all.
That last version polled the best. Using that question, Gallup found that 45 percent of respondents approved of the ACA and 49 percent disapproved.
In contrast, the version that referred only to “Obamacare” polled worst. Only 38 percent approved of Obamacare per se, while 54 percent of respondents disapproved.
The link:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2013/1129/Obamacare-vs.-Affordable-Care-Act-Does-the-name-matter

That is just one example. Conservative commentators like to describe the US as a deeply conservative country, again, to frame the debate. They repeat this even though a majority of US citizens, when polled, support unions, marriage equality, access to abortions, an increase in the minimum wage, a decrease in war spending, increased taxes on the rich, and other progressive measures.

I think Democrats/liberals/Progressives are losing the battle because the corporate media continues to frame the issues in favor of the 1%.

[1StrongBlackMan]

3. Oh, I agree that ...

people are generally more liberal than conservative in their unlabeled opinions.

Until they enter the voting booth.

And I do agree that the gop controls the framing because Democrats/liberals do not control the media.

[guillaumeb]

4. I like your caveat:

When you wrote:
"Until they enter the voting booth."

The privacy of the voting booth allows racism and sexism to flourish, but President Obama was elected and re-elected in spite of the open racism of the GOP political machine and individual racists in every state. We are moving forward. Slowly, but moving.

The really difficult part comes with the organizing that is always necessary for the 99% to combat the financial power of the 1%. Difficult, I feel, because it is a long and continuing struggle.

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. I agree ...

and made MORE difficult by confusing "I wish" typing on the internet, with actual struggling.

[guillaumeb]

7. More truth. Uncomfortable truth.

I have been a union member for 40 years. I have been an activist and local officer for over 30 years. I am also a 12 year member of a local, church based social justice group. We put on forums, have discussions, show movies, and participate in actions. I try to live my beliefs. When I spoke about the struggle and the frustration it was with the knowledge that the struggle is a long one, but that victories happen.

I agree that if more of us would organize and participate the struggle would be easier.

[1StrongBlackMan]

10. I thank you for your work ...

I, too, have a history of activism. And, TBH, I was recently in a conversation with my decidedly, apolitical, wife, where I told her I am tired ... after 30+ years of activism, I no longer have the energy to do what I know is necessary to affect wide-scale change; rather, I will focus my efforts on those (fairly) narrow interests that I am most concerned ... and I will work with the Democratic Party frame to accomplish whatever I can.

Sure ... I will continue with Democratic GOTV efforts, canvassing and campaign donations; I will not be beating the bushes, trying to identify and encourage folks to run ... nor, will I lead efforts to build issue oriented coalitions ... I'm just too tired. Instead, I will focus on my passion ... working with young men, particularly African-American manchilds, to prepare them for this big, bad, world.

[guillaumeb]

12. You say you are tired but continue to work.

When you wrote:
"Instead, I will focus on my passion ... working with young men, particularly African-American manchilds, to prepare them for this big, bad, world. "
just as important to work on an individual level. Micro politics and macro politics are equally important. Good luck.

[Rex]

6. Been working for the GOP for decades now, up until last November.

Maybe you should go study them and how they always get what they want and make us suffer for their actions. Or how Wall Street always gets what they want and makes the working poor suffer for their actions.

Let us now what you find out!

[1StrongBlackMan]

8. I guess it's a fundamental difference between Democrats and republicans (Wall Street) ...

though they have gotten far less than whatever they want. Democrats actually care about governing; whereas, republicans don't care if the house burns down.

I was once told: "In any relationship, the person that cares least about the relationship, will always control that relationship ... because they are more inclined to destroy that relationship wherever they don't get their way."

That's absolutely true; but, in governing relationships, "walking away"/"burning down the house" has dire consequences for the nation.

[Rex]

9. That's also why it is a huge horseshit load for people to say 'both parties are the same'.

Wall Street trends conservative, so it makes it harder for the Big Tent party imo...we still have these things called ethics and morals. The GOP sold theirs (ethics and morals) to foreign investors in the 80s and 90s. For some crappy economic system called Reaganomics.

One would think that after decades of maleficence by the GOP, there would be some dire consequences (and there are toward US) yet they never seem to be effected in the least bit.

Okay maybe a Tom Delay or Newt or Foley have to step down...and go back into the private sector world. Not much of a punishment for fucking up the entire country imo.