Why Joe Biden Is the Only True Progressive Candidate (Forbes)

[Drunken Irishman]

http://fortune.com/2019/05/24/joe-biden-progressive/

As the beneficiary of simultaneous attacks by both President Donald Trump from the right and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from the left, former Vice President Joe Biden could not have orchestrated it better. The good fortune of being caught in the crossfire of the polarized partisans defines Biden for who he is—the real progressive, just as he claims. And this may explain why Biden, with his unique reach across constituencies, towers over rivals in the latest polls.

...

In examining Biden’s record as a senator from 1973 to 2009, Biden was consistently ranked among the 25 most liberal senators and in the middle of the Democrat’s ideological spectrum. His progressive initiatives have had a lasting impact: Biden promoted the first bills fighting climate change and supported clean energy investment, authored the Violence Against Women Act, triumphed over the NRA with an assault weapon ban, and provided the diplomatic skill to get the Affordable Care Act ratified. While he has been widely decried for his Judiciary Committee chairmanship of the Clarence Thomas hearings, Biden expressed regret for how Anita Hill’s case against Thomas was handled.

...

Authentic 20th century progressives, by contrast, were centrist reformers and included moderate Democrats and forward-looking Republicans like Wisconsin Senator Robert LaFollett and Democrats like Montana Senator Burton K. Wheeler. They were running mates as President and Vice President candidates nominated at the Progressive Party’s first national convention in 1924. As progressives, they transcended party differences to champion the construction of highways and bridges while protecting forests, cleaning up pollution from cities, improving unsafe workplaces with efficient factories and scientific management, and celebrating technological inventors. This was done while also welcoming new immigrants, offering settlement houses to orient them, and giving new arrivals a shot at the American dream. Rather than drive wedges between groups based on their backgrounds, the progressives stood for national unity and shared values.

Biden is neither socialist not populist. He is the true American progressive.

[murielm99]

1. I like Joe.

I could support him.

It makes me laugh that both AOC and Trump criticize him. Trump is a given. I don't think this says anything positive about her.

[George II]

24. Since we're discussing progressives and you brought up her name, so far in this session....

....(since she's a freshman and this is her only session) Progressive Punch rates her progressive score at 211 of 233 Democrats in the House:

https://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?topic=&house=house&sort=overall-current&order=down&party=

[aidbo]

2. Lol, no.

[BannonsLiver]

8. Funny, that's my reaction every time I hear Bernie speak.

[aidbo]

13. Nope, it's not funny. Just sad.

[BannonsLiver]

19. Surely you must be talking about Bernie's poll numbers.

[Celerity]

23. 4% with older voters (50 and above)... ouch

[George II]

25. Ouch is right, 4% in one's own age group is stunning.

[Fresh_Start]

28. sometimes wisdom comes with age

other times, wisdom is resisted at all ages

[NYMinute]

3. K&R nt

[emmaverybo]

33. Beto made a strong, succinct case for impeachment on Nicole Wallace. nt

[50 Shades Of Blue]

4. How'd Joe vote on the Hyde Amendment?

[Politicub]

6. What about it? It was a wrong move. No one is going to have a perfect record.

Something for you to chew on from the editorial:

Biden promoted the first bills fighting climate change and supported clean energy investment, authored the Violence Against Women Act, triumphed over the NRA with an assault weapon ban, and provided the diplomatic skill to get the Affordable Care Act ratified. While he has been widely decried for his Judiciary Committee chairmanship of the Clarence Thomas hearings, Biden expressed regret for how Anita Hill’s case against Thomas was handled.

What's important is that someone learns from their mistakes or missteps and makes concrete changes to atone for them. Apologizing is one thing, but taking action is the true measure of meaningful change. It's yet to be seen what Biden will do to atone for his behavior around the Clarence Thomas hearings, but I believe that he will take action in some way as president.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

7. His votes against reproductive rights are still part of his record.

[BannonsLiver]

9. I think what the poster is saying is they aren't a single issue voter

That they can disagree with a candidate on some issues yet still vote for them in the primary. It’s a novel concept for some folks, apparently.

[Cha]

42. "It's a novel concept for some folks, apparently."

That they can disagree with a candidate on some issues yet still vote for them in the primary. It’s a novel concept for some folks, apparently.

Well, put!

[Demit]

12. "how Anita Hill's case against Thomas was handled"

That paragraph illustrates Joe Biden perfectly. The first five facts about him are in the active voice—he promoted, supported, authored, triumphed over, provided—he DID all those things. But when it comes to how he directed the Clarence Thomas hearings, the piece, like Joe Biden himself, slips into the passive voice. Biden can only regret how the case against Thomas "was handled."

[Politicub]

14. I'm not sure what to tell you. I'm not Biden. I'm not even sure of what the point of your post is.

I will say this, though:

How he handled Anita Hill bugs me.
His vote for the Hyde Amendment was a wrongheaded move.

Here's the thing, though: they are not enough to burn down the house the save it.

If Biden is our nominee, I will vote for him without reservation. I will volunteer for his campaign. I will knock on doors, as I would for our eventual nominee.

But just like Obama, it is our job to hold his feet to the fire as president -- any democratic president -- to do something to right his wrongs. He has already started to reconcile these things.

[Demit]

20. The point of my post is that Joe Biden continues to evade responsibility

for his negative actions. It's what people do when they want to avoid acknowledging their agency in a situation, that what they did was wrong, or directly caused damage, they describe it in passive voice. I see that you have no problem phrasing the thing in a direct way: "how he handled Anita Hill..." Biden does have that problem. I have many reservations about Joe Biden, and this is the one that makes me saddest. I'll vote for him if he turns out to be the nominee because I am a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, a yellow-dog Democrat. But Joe Biden is not the best we can do by a long shot, and I'll say that all primary-season long.

[George II]

27. He doesn't evade responsibility for his actions ("negative" or not)....

He's addressed them more than once. With respect to Anita Hill, now 28 years ago, he's addressed it several times just this year.

BTW, to remind myself of the year of that hearing, 1991, I googled Anita Hill. Curiously one of HER quotes under her biographical synopsis, is:

"I did what my conscience told me to do, and you can't fail if you do that."

That goes for Joe Biden, too.

https://www.google.com/search?q=anita+hill&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS725US725&oq=anita+hill&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61l2.2177j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[emmaverybo]

39. It has only become a Biden vs. Hill event in deconstruction. Anyone watch the hearings? Joe

not the one who tried to humiliate her. He voted against Thomas and has always said he believed her. Senator Heflin called her delusional, a fantasist. Grassley, Spector...and Thomas cowed the Dems when he called the hearings a high tech lynching.
Biden got some jabs in at Thomas. Kennedy looked like he did not want to be there.
This retrospective view that Biden somehow harassed and ruined Hill is completely inaccurate.
I hope someday Hill speaks out against Thomas and the Republicans who used him.

[Cha]

43. Thanks for the quote from Anita Hill, Geoge..

If it's good enough for her it should be good for Joe Biden, too.

[Politicub]

34. I'm glad I gave you an opportunity to get that out of your system

[Demit]

38. I've been vocal about him before, and will continue to be,

your odd self-congratulation notwithstanding.

[Demsrule86]

91. Years ago don't care... Joe is the only candidate who can repair the blue wall

Which is our only path to beating Trump. I also like Joe. I have evolved myself on some isues and don't hold the decades old shit drummed up by Republicans and those supporting other (who have no chance of winning a general in my opinion) candidates in the primary,

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

101. Handled by whom?

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Cha]

40. Mahalo, Politicub!

[Politicub]

5. Biden is a progressive, indeed. To be progressive is to make progress, not just talk about it.

And, I agree with this editorial. Biden will get progressive policies implemented because he's realistic. That's a big part of the what I consider a progressive -- a political philosophy that leads to liberal policies being implemented over time. That's progress. The big ideas of populists are seductive, but they are more philosophical than actions that can be carried out with our current structure of governance.

Progressive policies will be the seeds that get planted that will grow into the fabric of our everyday lives. The ACA is an example. It's not going away. It is going to go through changes. Some will be painful changes and there will be setbacks, of course. But, at last, Obama put us on the path to universal healthcare.

We're not going to get anywhere overnight and need to keep our expectations in check. About the only thing that bears fruit instantly are tax cuts that make the rich richer. But think about important progressive policies: Universal pre-k will change the country, but we won't see the effects overnight. Making concurrent policies that address climate change will affect the planet in a positive way, but we won't see or feel the benefits for decades.

There are a lot of flaws in our political system. How the electoral college operates is one of them. But we need a candidate who knows how to work within the system to begin to change it. Our system of government will not be suddenly swept away because a candidate makes it into office. Trump, for example, is causing a lot of damage, but he is hamstrung now by the democratically-led house. His damage to institutions can be fixed. None of his screwing with the FBI comes from any legislation that has been passed.

On edit: I don't believe Biden is the only true progressive running. There are others. Elizabeth Warren knows how to pull the strings of government and will get things accomplished (see the Consumer Financial protection Bureau). Harris has served in congress and will be able to navigate the institutional barriers to change within the system as she reforms it.

[Fresh_Start]

29. totally agree

to be progressive, you must achieve progress

I'm late boomer...so I've got more than 30 years of work experience and nearly as many years of volunteering

There are people who get things done...and there are people who stand around and complain about what is being done...without once breaking a sweat to help

I support those doing the hard labor

[BannonsLiver]

10. I prefer the term liberal

It actually has meaning and wasn’t a term people fled to when the GOP tried to make liberal a dirty word.

[LakeArenal]

32. Agree

[rurallib]

11. Maybe I am contrarian, but Forbes

was once a magazine for those with money. At least it was when I last looked at a Forbes - which was long ago.
Therefore I will tend to be dismissive of them telling me what a progressive is.

[Hortensis]

17. Truth's wherever we find it. Trump saying the economy

has always done better under Democratic administrations doesn't make that not true. He of course doesn't say it any more.

All Democrats are progressive, only varying in degree. FDR and his New Deal team were very much "establishment" liberals joined to make it happen by moderate, progressive conservatives, the type this article describes.

The counterparts of those who call themselves capital-P Progressives these days in those days loathed and raged at FDR as a scorrupt corporatist yada-yada and betrayer of "the people." The 1930s were a time of extremist risings, and they saw it as their chance to create a true socialist revolution and did their best to defeat both FDR and the New Deal.

Not to be surprised. Can you imagine a rigid ideologue like Bernie Sanders approving and working with wealthy FDR to create the New Deal? Even without all the compromises required by having to create a majority with the new black monolith and the rabid Southern conservative faction in one party? Not a chance!

[Eric J in MN]

48. Bernie Sanders wrote part of the ACA

...and voted for the ACA.

[Blue_true]

50. What part of the ACA did Senator Sanders write? That claim is a first, never heard that. nt

[Eric J in MN]

53. The part funding community health centers. NT

NT

[Hortensis]

66. Yes, Sanders did contribute that, so no else did.

The Republicans also offered and had included nearly 200 items as part of making this an inclusive bipartisan bill.

Both Sanders and the Republicans then tried to destroy it. A difference is that Sanders did vote for it before deciding that healthcare would still be his most advantageous issue to run on, even with the ACA passed.

A shame, since his belief that we needed to attack wealth inequality was what interested me in him.
However, healthcare was closer to home for most people, including those he needed to draw from the right, and going after the billionaires was less appealing to the right, so the target was the ACA.

[Eric J in MN]

67. In 2017, Bernie Sanders did rallies

...in multiple states to save the ACA.

Bernie Sanders said during a TV interview that John McCain might vote to save the ACA shortly before he did.

[Hortensis]

68. Did it ever occur to you that if the Republicans had

succeeded Sanders would very rightly be blamed for his part in it? Of course he covered by calling for the need to save the lousy ACA temporarily until it could be repealed and replaced with HIS program.

I look at EVERYTHING the real Bernie Sanders has done. And is still doing.

Sanders currently opposes improvements to the ACA, including expanded coverages and lowered premiums, for strictly political reasons. An ACA that serves people well would lessen support for his proposal, which at best could not be fully implemented for at best several years, in the area of 7 or 8.

The sum total of Sanders' actions has been devastating to progressivism in America, literally as bad as Trump's. As a lifelong liberal progressive, I am emphatically not an admirer. I'm also not exactly a great admirer of loyal followers who support and manage to justify whatever their chosen leader does either.

[Eric J in MN]

75. So your theory is that

...Bernie Sanders, who frequently talks about healthcare from the 1980s to the present, doesn’t really care about healthcare, and just did rallies to save the ACA to avoid being blamed if it were repealed?

[Blue_true]

80. Most of what you wrote was not claimed by Hortensis.

I honestly don't remember Bernie holding rallies to save the ACA. I do remember Chuck Shumer and Diane Feinstein working their asses off to get wavering republicans on our side. That is my recollection.

Hortensis made a very cogent point. Senator Sanders' my way or the highway tone on major change legislation has hurt progressivism by giving republicans time to rally their forces while we focused on getting Bernie fully on our side. That dynamic has often caused us to lose the valuable factor of time and forced us into negotiating with republicans to get at least something meaningful done toward progress.

[Hortensis]

82. That's not my memory either, though I believe he did

speak up for the ACA after Republicans won and it was in very serious danger of being repealed -- as he and they had insisted it should be over the nearly two years of campaigning, but in their case of course without replacement.

Tomorrow, tomorrow, I love ya tomorrow. You're only 527 days a-waaay!

[Cha]

77. Well Done, Hortensis.. Mahalo!

[Fresh_Start]

31. sorry to break it to you

there are liberals with money
and there are poor who hate progress longing for the good old days

[rurallib]

36. thanks for the attitude

[tonedevil]

51. I thought the exact same thing. /nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

110. "Tend to be dismissive" is putting it mildly... Forbes had ZERO credibility with me!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[aikoaiko]

15. I'm skeptical of Fortune magazine bias on what counts for political progressivism

I respect Joe as a moderate Democrat -- not a progressive.

[pnwmom]

16. Being ranked among the 25 most liberal Senators hardly makes you a big progressive

compared to OTHER DEMOCRATS. It simply puts you somewhere in the center or top half of the Democrats.

Thanks, Fortune business magazine, but there are plenty of other Democrats who more progressive.

[mtnsnake]

69. That's the first thing that came to my mind, too, when I read the second paragraph of the OP

If he was consistently ranked in the top 5 or 10, maybe it would be relevant, but in the top 25 of liberal senators, when only Democrats would be in the top 25 anyway? It's ridiculous to use that as any kind of barometer in being the most progressive of the 2020 candidates when top 25 isn't close to being impressive. The article is more spin than proof of anyone being the most progressive candidate.

[Celerity]

79. +10000

[KayF]

18. this author thinks Tim Sloan was a great CEO

just so we know where he's coming from

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/28/wells-fargo-ceo-tim-sloans-retirement-a-mistake-says-jeff-sonnenfeld.html

“This was a moment of great shame for Sen. Warren that she helped drive out a great CEO,” he said.

“This was a big mistake,” said Sonnenfeld, senior associate dean at the Yale School of Management and a CNBC contributor.

Sloan was the one who was actually bringing the bank’s problems to light and fixing them, he argued.

And his tenure in the top office produced results, he said. “He’s delivered the best earnings ... in the company’s 161-year history. It’s really been incredible.”

[shanny]

83. that one leaves a mark

[ProfessorPlum]

21. Biden is of the Establishment

that may be good or bad. But he comes across as someone who doesn't really want who is in the Establishment to change, or how those in the Establishment make money and consolidate power.

Other labels are kind of useless if people don't acknowledge this obvious fact about him.

[Cha]

44. Ohhhh "Establishment"..

lol.. so is John Lewis!

[progressoid]

73. You're confusing "establishment" with "established"

The Establishment is the dominant group or elite that holds power or authority in a nation or organisation. It may be a closed social group which selects its own members or specific entrenched elite structures, either in government or in specific institutions.

-vs-

Established: successful for a long period of time and widely known. Accepted and recognized or followed by many people.

One can be established without being part of "the establishment"

[Cha]

76. Sure can.. but I'm not "confused"..

John Lewis was called that as an insult.. just like this BS press sec insulted him.

Link to tweet

[riverine]

54. I want a long-time established Democrat

and not an interloper "Democrat when convenient".

[Demsrule86]

92. The establishment as you call it produced Democratic majorities. The tear it down

Crowd (Geen Jill stein slime) produces Republican majorities and presidents. The establishment produced policy as well...not so much the other side.

[crazytown]

22. So Ted Kennedy was not an "Authentic 20th century progressive"

This attempt to rewrite history is gut turning. FDR 'I welcome their hate' was devoted to Unity rather than saving capitalism? Not an authentic 20th Century progressive either? The wedge progressives want to drive is not between people of different backgrounds but, in TR's words, the "unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics".

"When a government works just for those at the top that’s corruption – plain and simple. And we’ve got to call it out because what’s happened in this country is in effect on every decision that gets made from giant ones that we see out in front like drilling off shore down to minute regulatory decisions there is almost always somebody in the room representing the rich the powerful or multiple someone’s trying to get the field tilted just a little bit more in favor of their clients and not just once but twice 20 times, two hundred times, two thousand times. And the consequence has been we now have a government that (is) not working for the people ... Whatever issue brings you to the table, whether it’s around economic issues, gun safety, climate change, net neutrality, it all intersects through this fundamental ... corruption."

Those of are the words, of a progressive, a proud Democratic progressive. Elizabeth Warren.
https://crooked.com/podcast/elizabeth-warren-talks-dogs-and-capitalism/

[ucrdem]

59. Sorry wrong place . . .

[ucrdem]

60. whoops that's twice

it's been a long week . . .

[crazytown]

62. I think my reply was in exactly the right place

Authentic 20th century progressives, by contrast, were centrist reformers ... rather than drive wedges between groups based on their backgrounds, the progressives stood for national unity and shared values.

Breaking up corruption and monopolies is divisive.

[ucrdem]

63. No worries. For the record, the article doesn't mention the Kennedys at all.

It's talking about early 20th century Progressive party of Teddy Roosevelt, though for some reason it doesn't mention him either.

[crazytown]

64. No indeed. The article is written as if the left stream of progressives didn't exist

Yes, Joe Biden is an authentic progressive. What I have a problem with is trying to define 'true progressives'. There is no such thing.

[HopeAgain]

26. Fortune Magazine??

'nuff said...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

107. It sure is!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Fiendish Thingy]

30. Sharp analysis from Forbes, America's true progressive news source

[LakeArenal]

35. More or less progressive....

Biden is the most liked and qualified nationally and globally.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

37. Forbes... say no more!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!
Welcome to the revolution!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

41. +1000

[Cha]

45. Great Factual analysis! Can't

argue with that.. so it's deflection time for some.

[Ace Rothstein]

46. LMAO

[Eric J in MN]

47. Votes by Joe Biden include for

- The Hyde Amendment against domestic abortion funding

- The Global Gag Rule against foreign abortion funding, including for groups which merely advise on abortion

- Welfare Reform (cutting welfare)

- The Iraq War Resolution

- Bush Bankruptcy Bill making it harder for individuals to declare bankruptcy

[shanny]

84. "Gutting" welfare--fixed it for ya--

while simultaneously pushing for a tough response to crime and building more prisons.

I have a problem with all of those things, and therefore with Joe.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

111. That's part of the reason Joe has serious work to do to convince progressive Democrats

that he's the best candidate to represent their interests.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Honeycombe8]

49. Unfortunately, that Republican Party referenced in the article is gone. Replaced by extremists...

Those extremists want to do the opposite of protecting forests and stopping climate change. Those extremists think the word "compromise" is porn language. Their idea of bipartisan is a Democrat bending to their will, and smiling while doing it.

We're not in Kansas, anymore, Toto.

[YOHABLO]

52. No, Biden is not a Progressive. He's a centrist Democrat. Period, the end, finished.

[Drunken Irishman]

55. Na'. He's a progressive.

[pnwmom]

71. He's a progressive compared to Republicans, but not to most other Democrats. n/t

[riverine]

56. Biden is smack in the middle of Democrats today

Progressives/Socialists are on the fringe of the party today.

[YOHABLO]

58. That's what you think.

[Celerity]

78. +10000, Forbes is a centre-right (if not outright RW) rag trying to gaslight

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

108. True dat!! How is this even debatable?!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Irishxs]

57. Biden IS A true progressive, and someone with sense--both necessary qualities.

This Fortune article was excellent!!

[ucrdem]

61. I can see the logic. On guns and climate change alone he's at the head of the pack.

And then there's the ACA which has done more to provide affordable healthcare than anything Sanders has accomplished, apart from voting for the ACA. Now that was a progressive vote.



p.s. as to Anita Hill: Biden took that hearing where no SC confirmation hearing has gone before or since, and he gave her a respectful and supportive space to say her piece, which she did, with complete credibility. What she's still complaining about I frankly have no idea but I've long suspected the whole business of being an email-Benghazi concoction that wingnuts are so good at whipping up.

[shanny]

85. On climate change he's at the head of the pack?

actually if that is the case it is no laughing matter because We Are Doomed.

[ucrdem]

88. Politifact: History says yes.

Was Joe Biden a climate change pioneer in Congress? History says yes
By John Kruzel on Wednesday, May 8th, 2019 at 2:30 p.m.




https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/may/08/joe-biden/was-joe-biden-climate-change-pioneer-congress-hist/

In fact Biden introduced a climate change bill in 1987, nine years before Warren first registered as a Democrat:

In a recent interview over tea at her home in Cambridge, Massachusetts, she said she assumes the first time she registered as a Democrat was 1996, but added, “I’m not even 100 percent sure what I was registered as.”

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/12/elizabeth-warren-profile-young-republican-2020-president-226613

[shanny]

112. I am interested in "is" not "was"

and where Biden"is" now involves going back to the Paris agreement which is already--clearly--inadequate. Partnering with fossil fuel companies going forward is also a literal dead end.

The problem with plans and climate models is that the worst-case scenarios--over and over!--prove to be too optimistic; going back to previous goals in an accelerating situation is actually losing ground.

[GreenPartyVoter]

65. Having been through bankruptcy, and seeing it loom large once again,

I'm gonna have to disagree on this one.

[loyalsister]

72. American 20th century progressives

included proponents of controlling heredity in the interest of developing a superior population.
The explicit idea fell out of favor in the 40s but competition in education, social/economic positioning, and physicality, are still promoted in the pursuit of national advancement.

[YOHABLO]

86. So where did you cut and paste this little tidbit from? You should at least note resources.

[loyalsister]

87. There are plenty of sources

Between 1875 and 1925, when eugenics had many advocates, not all advocates were progressives but advocates were disproportionately progressives because eugenics coincided with progressivism’s premises and agenda.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-liberals-who-loved-eugenics/2017/03/08/0cc5e9a0-0362-11e7-b9fa-ed727b644a0b_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d790528d83ba

Less well known is that a crude eugenic sorting of groups into deserving and undeserving classes crucially informed the labor and immigration reform that is the hallmark of the Progressive Era (Leonard, 2003). Reform-minded economists of the Progressive Era defended exclusionary labor and immigration legislation on grounds that the labor force should be rid of unfit workers, whom they labeled “parasites,” “the unemployable,” “low-wage races” and the “industrial residuum.” Removing the unfit, went the argument, would uplift superior, deserving workers.
https://www.princeton.edu/~tleonard/papers/retrospectives.pdf

[ucrdem]

89. This has nothing whatsoevery to do with Biden. Period. nt

[loyalsister]

94. Your complaint is with the article cited in the OP

The point is 20th century progressivism is not a desirable association.

[progressoid]

74. Someone who favors credit card companies over consumers doesn't really get the progressive nod.

[shanny]

81. Oh FFS

we should buy Forbes' definition of "progressive"?

[ucrdem]

90. Because of the markets?

[shanny]

93. the "markets" that have done such great things

for the average joe? those markets?

[ucrdem]

95. Without getting too snarky here it's a reference to a remark

Elizabeth Warren made in 2011 when discussing her GOP past:

“I was a Republican because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets. I think that is not true anymore,” Warren says. “I was a Republican at a time when I felt like there was a problem that the markets were under a lot more strain. It worried me whether or not the government played too activist a role.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/elizabeth-warren-i-created-occupy-wall-street

But the larger point is that yes, it's the economy, as Bill kindly informed us in 1992 and 1996. Does that make Forbes a player? No, but on this subject at least it has some expertise.

[shanny]

96. I'm not very interested in the health of the markets

when the planet is on fire. We face an existential crisis, one that will call for massive government and international action, massive new funding, and a fundamental re-working of our economic system (from an extractive/exploitive model to a circular one).

Forbes' definition of progressive isn't even in the area code.

[ucrdem]

97. Agree, but nevertheless, the show must go on.

It would be nice for a full-monty makeover, but it's not going to happen. So it has to dovetail with what's already in place. That's what Barack and Joe did for 8 years and with great success , notwithstanding multiple setbacks inflicted by the RW -- the 2009 Copenhagen climate shut-out for example, facilitated by Julian Ass-hat and his disinfo operation.

[shanny]

98. Barack and Joe propped up the status quo.

That's what Joe apparently wants to go back to, despite the fact that the status quo was not working for average Americans before tRump, could not work for average Americans without fundamental changes, and will not work for average Americans in the hypothetical future.

I like Joe. He's not what we need right now.

[ucrdem]

99. Did you forget that they ended the Iraq war in 2009?

They propped up the economy, sure, but what would the alternative have been? Letting Detroit go bankrupt? As for the wars, Guantanamo, immigration, etc they did what could but Congress makes the laws. When we briefly had a Dem senate they got ACA through after 80 years of failed attempts at establishing a national health care program.


p.s. here's an example of propping up the status quo:

[shanny]

100. uh, just an FYI, dimson bush OKed the deal to end the Iraq War

--requiring all US troops out by the end of 2011--and Obama honored that agreement. He could hardly do otherwise, given the SOFA and the fact that Iraq refused to modify it.

"they propped up the economy", sure....but who benefited? who went to jail? who paid? who reaped the rewards? who still does, and who doesn't? who cut jobs, who created them and where? ask those questions, it might be an eye-opener

don't give me platitudes, look at the facts. and just as an fyi, the "national health care program" left 30 MILLION people uncovered--that's 10%--even before the pukes started denying Medicaid expansion and before tRump started fucking with it. Was it a bad thing? No...but it wasn't universal either, and had no mechanism to get to universal.

We all love Obama. He did good work patching things up and maybe he couldn't have done any better than he did. Doesn't really matter now. We have bigger problems than are dreamt of in our old philosophy.

[BannonsLiver]

103. There's a segment of the left who hates Obama as much as Fat Donnie

You’re interlocutor is a clear example of that.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

102. We need a revolution, not a "return to normalcy"!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[shanny]

105. I agree.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

106. And I do think Elizabeth gets us there. Could EASILY see her as #1 on the ticket... she's THAT good!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Ace Rothstein]

113. Yep

A return to the status quo will give us another Trump after 2024.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

114. How do some people not see this?!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Ace Rothstein]

115. Because they think Russia and Comey are the only reasons that Hillary lost in 2016.

It should never have been close enough for the election to be stolen in the manner it was.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

116. They WANT to think that... so true, as you say, that it shouldn't have even been close!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

109. Seriously!! What could be Forbes motivation?!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[happyaccident]

104. Could someone define the difference between a progressive and a liberal?

I'm always asking people to define their words. Thanx. And what I like about Elizabeth Warren is her ideas. One was that labor should have a 40% voice in the corporation they work for. I believe in profit sharing for workers too so maybe I'm a socialist? And I like that Warren is angry and passionate. Never trust posers.