Supporting TPP is written into the latest (2012) Democratic Party Platform:

[ucrdem]

We remain committed to finding more markets for American-made goods—including using the Trans-Pacific Partnership between the United States and eight countries in the Asia-Pacific, one of the most dynamic regions in the world—while ensuring that workers' rights and environmental standards are upheld, and fighting against unfair trade practices.

http://www.democrats.org/party-platform

Just in case you were wondering.

[tkmorris]

1. I wasn't

Although considering recent events it's a wonder it isn't part of the Republican platform rather than the Democrats.

[Hoyt]

2. Back then Democrats had foresight.

[ucrdem]

3. Ha.

Yeah back in the good ol' days.

[cali]

7. Fail, hoyt. When either party holds the WH

the National Committee of that party, functions as an arm of the WH. That information is anything but super secret, hoyt. You just don't know such basic info.

[ucrdem]

10. A few of us here would like to keep the WH in 2016.

Yes I know that might come as a shock.

[cali]

15. Yes, most of us would. Good reason not to pass this agreement.

Passing it could harm our chances of holding on to the WH.

Why do you think that most dems running for office in 2016 are vocal in their opposition to the TPP? Hmm. Could it be that they believe the electorate will be even more strongly opposed to it in 2016 than it currently is?

[ucrdem]

16. So far there's only one Dem running for pres, and she supports it.

And negotiating international treaties is a presidential duty per Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution.

[cali]

22. She hasn't said. She's waffled- as is her wont.

That's nicer than saying she's deliberately obfuscating to hide her position because she's afraid it will be unpopular with the voters she hopes to dupe.

In the real world, not the uc/lz fantasy world, there are two announced candidates running in the Democratic Primary. One is strongly opposed, not to mention that in another 10 days, another candidate will be in and he's already made his strong opposition known.

And treaties are also a duty of the U.S. Senate per the Constitution, lz. That's Article 2, section 2.

[peacebird]

27. There are actually two people running for Dem nom for President

But you knew that.

[ucrdem]

28. So far only one is a registered Democrat. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

53. In a state that doesn't have party registration.

These little sophistries get tiresome.

[ieoeja]

45. For the record, I believe Dole opposed the 1996 RNC platform.

A lot of pundits blamed delegates cheering on Pat Buchannan's openly racist diatribe at the RNC for Dole's loss that year. Cheering that speech and the delegate's platform rebellion would seem, in 20-20 hindsight, to indicate the Teabagger rebellion against Party leadership was already in full force.

An exception to the rule. That certainly did not happen to Obama.

[cali]

47. huh? I missed Dole being a sitting president

[ieoeja]

48. No, you didn't.

He was never President. But it was the only time I know of a Party rejecting their own Presidential nominees input on the platform. Just being the nominee is generally enough to be the boss.

[tridim]

4. What it doesn't say:

We will trash honest Democrats and fight our own party's efforts to craft a fair trade agreement, and kick the can down the road so a future Republican administration can do it instead without any regard for survival of the middle class.

[ucrdem]

5. LOL. That's in the super-secret version that they won't let us read.

WHAT ARE THEY HIDING??!!!111

[neverforget]

54. As if the Republicans in Congress now have "any regard for survival of the middle class"

Those middle class hero's like Mitch McConnell love this deal:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/17/mitch-mcconnell-tpp_n_7300842.html

"The president has done an excellent job on this," McConnell said in an interview with ABC's "This Week." "I point out to my members who are somewhat squeamish, as you can imagine, giving the president the power of any issue, given his expansive view of his powers on so many other issues. But this is a trade promotion authority not just for President Obama, but for the next president as well. This is a six-year trade promotion authority bill that will give the next president an opportunity to enter into additional trade agreements with other countries around the world."

[tridim]

57. Which is why I don't want them leading trade. Ever. I wan't Obama and the Democrats to do it.

As it is now.

[cali]

6. Clearly written when the DNC was an arm of the WH

as either National Committee is when there is either a Dem or Repub in the WH. And written some time ago- as indicated by the number of countries they say are in the TPP. They say 8. There are 11 other countries aside from the U.S. in the TPP
.

P.S. changed my original post to reflect the above.

[ucrdem]

8. Underwhelming.

But feel free to keep at it.

[cali]

9. Simply fact- but we all know- and in your case, I feel comfortable speaking

for the majority of DUers- that you, lz, are underwhelmed by facts and place your faith in falsehoods.

go for it, ucr/lz

[ucrdem]

11. Have you tried the word salad?

It's all the rage I'm told.

[cali]

14. oh, now you don't even know what word salad is. Clue:

my post wasn't word salad. (a bit clunky, but not close to being word salad)

As you seem to have a reading comprehension problem, let me rephrase:

It is a well known fact that the National Committee of the party holding the White House, functions as a political arm of the White House. That's not a very complicated concept is it? You should be able to grasp it.

The platform reflects Obama's priorities. Duh.

Happy to help you out. And I kept the language simple just for you; no big words to confuse you. Wasn't that thoughtful of me, my once known by another name here, friend?



kisses flung in your general direction

[Marr]

12. Well, you'd better file a Super Duper Formal Complaint with the party leadership then!

I'm sure you can get those filthy liberals kicked out.

[ucrdem]

13. I don't see any in the vicinity

so not to worry.

[cherokeeprogressive]

17. Excellent... since the committee that wrote the platform has read the full text...

Maybe they can share with us the benefits we're all in the dark about.

[ucrdem]

19. Benefits:

from the current party platform:

President Obama and the Democratic Party know that America has the best workers and businesses in the world. If the playing field is level, Americans will be able to compete against every other country on Earth. Over the last four years, we have made historic progress toward the goal of doubling our exports by 2015. We have taken steps to open new markets to American products, while ensuring that other countries play by the same rules. President Obama signed into law new trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama that will support tens of thousands of private-sector jobs, but not before he strengthened these agreements on behalf of American workers and businesses. We remain committed to finding more markets for American-made goods—including using the Trans-Pacific Partnership between the United States and eight countries in the Asia-Pacific, one of the most dynamic regions in the world—while ensuring that workers' rights and environmental standards are upheld, and fighting against unfair trade practices. We expanded and reformed assistance for trade-affected workers, and we demanded renewal of that help alongside new trade agreements.

Both publicly and privately, the President has made clear to the Chinese government that it needs to take steps to appreciate its currency so that America is competing on a level playing field. This administration has doubled the rate of trade cases brought against China by the last administration, and created a new government-wide Interagency Trade Enforcement Center. The President is committed to continuing to fight unfair trade practices that disadvantage American producers and workers, including illegal subsidies, non-tariff barriers, and abuse of worker rights or environmental standards.

http://www.democrats.org/party-platform

Hope that helps!

[cali]

23. It does. It always helps to see lies so clearly elucidated!

Thanks for posting that so everyone here can see those transparent lies. Much appreciated, lz.

[ucrdem]

26. So the Dem party platform is nothing but lies, lies and more lies.

What party did you say you were in again?

[JEB]

31. Coercion is not a good tactic here.

It is a bad plank...mandating support of an unknown.

[ucrdem]

32. It's pretty specific for an unknown.

Did you read the second paragraph?

[progressoid]

39. The second paragraph reference China.

But China isn't included in TPP. So, it's pretty specifically meaningless.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

42. If we were having this conversation a hundred or more years ago...

We would be talking about "Imperial Preference" which was the trade regime within the British Empire. It accidentally industrialized Canada by way of American manufactures setting up factories in Canada so they could reach the British mainland market without paying the tariffs imposed on US manufactured goods.

There is rarely any advantage to not being the member of a club.

If the US leaves itself in the cold on this and other trade agreements, US exports will become less competitive than those of our competitors and like the Imperial Preference days US manufactures will be incentivized to move production to more tariff advantageous countries. And guess what, unlike back then some of those countries already have free trade agreements with the US.

But don't let that stop you from smugly declaring victory outside the last paper plate factory in America.

[cherokeeprogressive]

43. Pssst... we're not having this conversation a hundred years ago.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

44. And the difference is what exactly?

Within the British Empire there was a preferential tariff regime, manufacturing for the British market in the US didn't make sense when Canada was right there. We will be in the same place all over again, Canada and Mexico will be in the club and we won't be - and oh yeah, NAFTA!

How exactly do you see that playing out differently? How is that beneficial?

[JEB]

18. No matter what is in the agreement?

Bad plank.

[ucrdem]

21. What is in the agreement right here:

https://ustr.gov/tpp

[cali]

24. thanks for the link to propaganda and more lies!

kisses and

[JEB]

29. I recognise a sales pitch when I see one.

I ain't buying it.

[tridim]

30. Why don't you trust our DEMOCRATIC President?

Please be specific.

[cali]

35. Why should I trust him on every issue? Loyalty? Aren't issues more

important than personality politics?

(Yes, I know you didn't ask me, but this is a discussion board and anyone can respond to anything posted)

The body of evidence that has now been amassed that demonstrates that the tpp is deeply flawed, both in process and content, is decisive.

1) The late draft leaked chapters on I/P, Environment and Investment. Analysis of those chapters by experts in the respective fields.

2) TPA and analysis of that document

3) History of failure on the part of the Obama admin to enforce labor and environmental standards in existing agreements.

4) Comments of Senators and Reps who have read the tpp and find it flawed- though they can't, under penalty of law, reveal specifics due to the unprecedented secrecy shrouding it.

5) Comments of an adviser to the USTR who has read it.

6) Comments of Professor Sean Flynn, I/P and trade expert who has met with USTR negotiators

7) The history of ballooning trade deficits incurred by FTAs

8) That the vast majority (over 80%) of advisors to the USTR on the TPP, were corporate CEOs and groups and individuals representing corporate interests.

9) That virtually all unions, public interest groups and environmental organiztions oppose it

10) That 151+ dem reps oppose it.

I could go on, but that should be more than enough

[JEB]

50. Just because I voted for him twice doesn't mean

I owe him blind allegiance. I do not trust the tired pitches used to sell these crippling trade agreements. We bought into this before and lost big time. Supporting TPP is a great way for Democrats to shoot themselves and our party in the foot.

[progressoid]

37. Wow, there is a lot of detailed information at that link.

They've boiled down all 2800 pages to a few paragraphs! That sure is helpful!

[RiverLover]

20. Are you trying to prove both parties are the same? TPP was Bush Jr's deal to begin with. /nt

[ucrdem]

25. International commerce is theoretically non-partisan.

Of course it rarely works out that way.

[Bobbie Jo]

46. Clearly your bailiwick. nt

[whatchamacallit]

33. It was also written on the wall of a truck stop restroom. So what?

[NuclearDem]

38. It kinda negates the Trojan Horse nonsense

when it's blatantly written into the platform like that.

The TPP is a fucking stupid idea, but to act like it was super duper secret and came out of nowhere is just as fucking stupid.

[Elwood P Dowd]

36. "Thank you for calling Hoyt-Ucrdem. We are currently away from our computer for lunch

break. Please call or post back after 1:45 EDT."

Hoyt-Ucrdem
TPP On America, Inc
Washington, DC

[Autumn]

40. Now that's just Loco

[neverforget]

55. Lol!

[99Forever]

41. It's almost as if they don't give a fuck what We the People think.

[Enrique]

49. and since the Democratic Party Platform is handed down from God himself

we have to support it.

[leftofcool]

51. Does this mean Bernie won't be running as a Democrat after all?

If this is part of the Democratic Party Platform...... Just askin?

[Cheese Sandwich]

52. That's a good reason to drop out of the Democratic Party.

They should take that out.

[LWolf]

56. Which is another reason why

the Democratic party is neo-liberal, and not the saviors of the 99%.

[Renew Deal]

58. Interesting

I didn't know that.