A populist candidate would say....

[kentuck]

Not only are we going to withdraw the troops from Afghanistan, we are going to cut the defense budget by 50% and we are going to repeal the DADT.

Also, not only are we going to let the Bush taxcuts expire, we are going to ask Congress to increase the taxrate to 50% on all millionaires and billionaires. They have robbed the American people for the last 3 decades and it is time for them to pay back some of their ill-gotten gains.

We are putting a stop to all corporations moving jobs off shore. Their taxbreaks for doing so will immediately end. They will not be permitted to bring their products back to our shores to sell for pennies on the dollar as they stuff their pockets with profits and take advantage of special tax breaks.

Effective immediately, we will request a tax on every share that is sold on Wall Street. We bailed them out. We saved their asses and it is time to get some of that money back. It is owed to the American people.

If the banks and the businesses of this country cannot create jobs, we will create our own bank to make sure entrepreneurs and small business have the money to expand when they need it. We will create jobs if the system cannot. We will not permit our people to suffer as the wealthy take more and more from the people.

How would that message compete with the present political Parties?

[Fumesucker]

1. DU has a Science Fiction forum..

You can discuss fantasy there too..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=265

:hi:

[kentuck]

2. But the question is?

Would the people vote for it?

[Fumesucker]

4. The people would never get the chance..

The Powers That Be would never allow it to come to any sort of vote..

And by the time the M$M got done demonizing such a platform with the volume set to 11 not all that many would vote for it anyway.

Keep in mind that about 80% of Americans are religious and atheists/agnostics are more knowledgeable about religion, that tells you all you really need to know about Americans to figure out how easy they are to manipulate.

[kentuck]

5. So you do not believe President Obama could sell the above message?

Then there is no need for discussion from Democrats. We should simply accept what the President is doing and stop whining and complaining, right?

[Fumesucker]

7. Sure Obama *could* sell that program..

But thinking he _would_ do so is purest fantasy..

The Wingerati and the Teahadists would have a fit that would make Mount St Helens look like a wet firecracker, wouldn't be prudent.

[kentuck]

8. Could he sell it to the American people?

Regardless of the fits from the Wingerati and Teahadists?

Are the American people ready for such a message?

[Fumesucker]

9. I think I already indicated in the affirmative to that..

But. It. Will. Not. Happen

I think you are way overdue for your drug test, you fucking cognitively challenged whiner you. ;)

:hi:

[kentuck]

11. I'm only pointing out where some people are at....

:-)

[kentuck]

10. Also, I would guess ...

that a primary opponent with this message would scare the Democrats much more than this present bunch of Republicans? Just a hunch...

[Al Claybon]

3. It would be attacked by both sides. Populism is only good for movies and false populism

is only good for revving up the Klanbaggers.

Until enough people in this country decide that they have had enough of the two-headed corporatist arrangement, not much of significance will change.

One would hope that the views and message you present would get the supposedly-liberal population to support someone making such a statement, but I have little faith that the system we currently suffer under would allow it much exposure or even-handed evaluation. It threatens the PTB too much.

[kentuck]

6. Which part is too radical for the American people to accept?

??

[Al Claybon]

12. I fear, every single bit... First, you're fucking with the military and our warmongers should

not be hampered by 1) surrendering in the ME, 2) cutting the budget, or 3) letting them perverts destroy the moral purity of our brave fightin' boys.

You cannot raise taxes on the wealthy because someday, I will be rich.

Any interference in the wonderful American economic machine by limiting the profits that flow to the owners (again, I will become one, someday) is downright treason, don'tcha know.

Again you libs want to raise taxes on the hard-working investor class. That stifles growth.

Finally, you want the gubmint to start a bank. We all know that them public employees are just lazy welfare recipients with connections. They cannot do anything right.

Lest anyone think I believe any of these excuses, here is the :sarcasm:.

But I do believe that these positions will be attacked by the Dems, the pukes, and the media with the bullshit arguments I mention.

Populism requires, among other things, an effective spokesperson and an outlet for getting the message out. Without BOTH, there will be no progress.

[kentuck]

13. I would agree with this point..

"Populism requires, among other things, an effective spokesperson and an outlet for getting the message out. Without BOTH, there will be no progress."

But I would not discount the peoples disenchantment with the political system. And, in the end, the poeple vote and the cowards in Washington have to listen or else.

[Statistical]

14. Even IF Obama did say those thing he has no power to enforce them.

We have a government which consists of three branches. Obama making a host of outlandish promises he simply can't keep would be fail. He would never get such a comprehensive list passed HOWEVER it would still be used against him (and Democrats in general) thus a lose-lose.

Lastly I think some of your concepts would be reckless.

Cutting defense budget 50% is a good idea but it needs to be cut over time. The DOD employs millions of people (govt employees, private contractors, and servicemen). A a time of record employment cutting the budget 50% would result in mass layoffs. Millions more flooding into unemployment lines.

We need to peruse "fair trade" but closing US borders would be a violation of WTO agreements. You are aware the US is the 3rd largest exporter in the world right? That we would see reciprocal sanctions against US exports and have a cripling effect on US economy (15% of GDP and tens of millions of jobs comes from exports).

[kentuck]

15. Unemployment would cost less than a salary per soldier...

Which has been estimated at $1,000,000 dollars per soldier in Afghanistan! How much unemployment could we pay with what we saved??

[Statistical]

16. It isn't a 1 to 1 relationship.

That $1 mil is per soldier IN Afghanistan. I never said we shouldn't get of big A. The reality is the DOD employs people. A significant portion of it's budget is payroll. Also indirectly it purchases goods and services from American companies. Everything from Lockheed Martin to Dell gets billions in contracts which they then have to fulfil requiring more labor.

Cutting spending is cutting spending. You can't be against cutting spending in a recession while at the same time saying we should cut defense spending in a recession. Also a cut of 50% instantly is just plain unrealistic. Economies are like a body of water. A small change is fine. Doing something like cutting defense spending by $200 billion overnight would be like dropping a boulder into a lake. It is going to create waves and slosh. Companies will instantly see orders canceled. In a panic they will cut their workforce.

If Dell for sees couple hundred million in server orders from DOD disappear it won't remain static. It will kill it's qtrly earnings and almost overnight to reassure investors (and to stem the bleeding) it will announce layoffs.

That doesn't even get into the sentiment effect. Say cutting DOD budget by 50% overnight results in 4 million layoffs. No problem right you can use the saved money to pay for unemployment..... Not quite. While you can pay for it. There are two problems. One the U-3 just jumped to 15%. Obama is done. Period. End of story. Never going to get re-elected. I mean the Republicans could put up a rotting tree stump and win. Second the the muliplier effect. Each person laid off cuts back spending and that results in companies cutting their workforces and those people cut back spending and the cycle continues.

Simply put some of your proposals are simply unrealistic
Don't feel bad most Populistic rhetoric normal is.

[kentuck]

17. How many employees does Dell have in this country??

Aren't most of their employees overseas, in places like India and the Philippines? I don't buy your argument.

[Statistical]

18. Then don't buy it I am not selling anything.

Anyone working for DOD either directly or as contractor must have security clearance and as such must (no exemptions) be a US citizen.

Still carry own w/ your dream to rip $200B+ in spending out of DOD overnight w/ no consequences.