2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum"Superprepared warrior realist" vs "fantasist who’s at passionate war with reality"
The NY Daily News utterly nailed the Democratic Primary.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)I'm so old I can remember the "Peace Dividend", I think of it from time to time and shake my head.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Some of us are still members of the reality based community.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)they interviewed him.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)The warrior-fantasist who lost a battle with a pretzel.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)What a surprise...
https://www.thenation.com/article/surprise-ten-years-ago-many-top-newspapers-did-oppose-us-war-against-iraq/
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)But it's snot right.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And he's just a strong on social liberalism as HRC. HRC, having taken Wall Street money, can never stand with the people on economic issues.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)His healthcare proposal has been widely panned by liberal economists and policy analysts for using Paul Ryan style "magic asterisk" accounting. At one point he was even claiming to save more than 100% of prescription drug costs. And his economic projections are just as fantastical, as is the amount he claims he can raise with his Wall Street tax, and so on.
Vermont tried his single payer idea, and they had to drop it because they realized that the magic unicorns were never going to show up.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Nothing Bernie has proposed has ever been silly, and no one should ever be mocked for fighting for real change.
Tiny, cheap changes never help anyone. There is no such thing as an idea that has progressive results but is fiscally conservative.
You just hate the fact that a candidate who has ideals is doing well.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The fact is, almost nothing that Bernie is proposing is feasible, neither economically nor politically. It's all a mirage.
And it's been gone through in detail. But at a high level: do you ever stop to think how Bernie can afford Scandinavian style government services without Scandinavian level taxes?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)No significant number of people can be helped by any of the tiny changes HRC proposes.
And if the Republicans are going to block any progressive changes proposed by HRC, they'll all block all of HRC's micro-changes, too.
Nothing corporate power accepts can ever be worth doing. Corporations just want things to stay like they are now for the rest of eternity.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)What Bernie is proposing is not worth doing because it won't work.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And certainly no fiscally conservative proposal.
History proves this.
Why are you fighting so hard to make this party an ideal-free zone?
That's what "pragmatism" means...having no ideals, no principles, no dreams. It means being stuck in the dead zone of the Nineties forever.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Let me guess, you're not one of those people so it doesn't matter to you.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)As he fights to replace it with something better, the ACA will remain in place. Bernie will veto any efforts to repeal it, as any other Democratic president automatically would.
We don't have to give up on single-payer just to keep the ACA in place. And if Congress dilutes the ACA any further, it can't be worth keeping in place. Nothing short of what's in there now is of any value at all.
Whatever else happens, the ACA will be there until we get single-payer.
And if any legislation remedying the intolerable flaws in the current ACA(such as the lack of a public option)gets through Congress in the meantime, Bernie will obviously sign them.
People would have been in a lot better place about the pathetic remnants of the ACA that did get passed(only the parts that didn't make any real difference to anyone, in the end)if the administration had based the 2010 Democratic midterm campaign on a commitment to try to defeat the legislators who watered the ACA down to nothing and then fight for improvements to it after the election. Instead, the admin. and the DNC and the DCCC and DSCC all told us to just shut up and forever settle for what we were given, while making it clear that they would not defend the ACA on the stump, would not make a major effort to at least try and hold small majorities in either chamber(they all conceded defeat by late August, basically)and would not do anything to encourage the Obama movement to stay active mobilizing the grassroots for change.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)The royal we?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)That cat is solid
obamneycare
(40 posts)- Endorsed by 170 top American economists
$15/hr National Min Wage:
- Endorsed by over 200 top American economists
Financial Transaction Tax (Robin Hood Tax):
- Endorsed by The Vatican, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Ban Ki-moon, Kofi Anan, ...
Single payer healthcare proposal:
- Endorsed by group of 20,000+ physicians
All of the above:
- Endorsed by majorities of the American electorate
jfern
(5,204 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)that he keeps taking money from people to make Tad Devine rich even now that he has no chance of winning.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)But you knew that. You just can't stop agitating the metabolic byproducts container.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And no change that is small enough for the rich to approve of can ever be worth doing.
Besides which, there is no one anywhere in the fall that would vote for HRC but not Bernie.
People who want corporations to dominate life don't have any progressive views.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Was outdated 10 years ago.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Funhouse mirrors?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)THAT made me laugh.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Not one that wants to send others out and stays at home and laughs about someone dying.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)reality. It's just that his ideas are so unrealistic, that one imagines him metaphorically being "at war" with it.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Must be nice in you little cubbyhole.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)And no amount of Debbie-ing preparations, WAR, and "reality" perceptions will make the status quo tenable. The 20th century is OVER!
LexVegas
(6,067 posts)Lone_Wolf
(1,603 posts)Methinks the NY Daily News doesn't know what "Realist" means.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)The only thing Clinton is super prepared to do is to continue the status quo which has gotten us in this mess.
Bernie is at war with the reality they want you to believe is not changeable. If that is the case, welcome to the U.S. Branch of the Corporate World.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)"Fantasist" Sanders on the floor of the House of Representatives in the Fall of 2002:
One, I have not heard any estimates of how many young American men and women might die in such a war or how many tens of thousands of women and children in Iraq might also be killed. As a caring Nation, we should do everything we can to prevent the horrible suffering that a war will cause. War must be the last recourse in international relations, not the first.
Second, I am deeply concerned about the precedent that a unilateral invasion of Iraq could establish in terms of international law and the role of the United Nations. If President Bush believes that the U.S. can go to war at any time against any nation, what moral or legal objection could our government raise if another country chose to do the same thing?
Third, the United States is now involved in a very difficult war against international terrorism as we learned tragically on September 11. We are opposed by Osama bin Laden and religious fanatics who are prepared to engage in a kind of warfare that we have never experienced before. I agree with Brent Scowcroft, Republican former National Security Advisor for President George Bush, Sr., who stated, ``An attack on Iraq at this time would seriously jeopardize, if not destroy, the global counterterrorist campaign we have undertaken.''
Fourth, at a time when this country has a $6 trillion national debt and a growing deficit, we should be clear that a war and a long-term American occupation of Iraq could be extremely expensive.
Fifth, I am concerned about the problems of so-called unintended consequences. Who will govern Iraq when Saddam Hussein is removed and what role will the U.S. play in ensuing a civil war that could develop in that country? Will moderate governments in the region who have large Islamic fundamentalist populations be overthrown and replaced by extremists? Will the bloody conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Authority be exacerbated? And these are just a few of the questions that remain unanswered.
Meanwhile in the Senate "superprepared warrior realist" Hillary Clinton had this to say:
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.
Now this much is undisputed.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Don't care what your new favorite news source "thinks". FH.
marmar
(77,081 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)NY Daily hasn't ever been the best at choosing its words carefully.
mcar
(42,334 posts)HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)AuntPatsy
(9,904 posts)We would still reside deep inside cave dwellings if we so easily gave up.
I've watched All sides attempt to destroy each other in most cases based on personal beliefs becoming the battle cry, its well known how we as a species can form opinions regardless if those opinions are based on the truth...
A bit more of humility towards each other could aid in moving things towards a satisfying ending for everyone, not any one group on this earth deserves more than the other...
its a small world we thankfully have not fully destroyed yet, we seriously need to work together more often, but to do that one must have respect for our differences, not harshly judge them, class warfare is real and for the most part unworthy of being useful for positive outcomes for everyone,
debating is not only an art but a form of an attempt to differ with reason and empathy not ending up being a seek and destroy outcome.
JMO
Retrograde
(10,137 posts)The quote in the OP sums up my thinking. Sanders has raised a lot of issues that need to be out in the open, and if he could get half of his ideas implemented as president that would be great, but having been voting in presidential races for over 40 years I've seen a lot of enthusiastically received candidates run head-on into the reality of the office. I liked the job Clinton did as senator, and she has the edge on foreign matters, but is not wildly inspiring in large venues, and is dragging a lot of baggage from Bill. I'm leaning slightly towards Clinton as I think she'll handle life in the fishbowl better, but without passion.
There's no way I'll vote for a Republican in November, and unless in a coma or dead fully intend to vote, so I'll go with the Democratic nominee. But I'm very disappointed that the DNC hasn't been cultivating the young party talent over the past four years, taking instead the GOP approach to run Clinton since it's perceived to be her turn.