Democratic (Party) Direction

one thing i was thinking about is how like, during the entirety of Obama's term, his Unique Individual Greatness [insert fart sound effects as you read the inevitable Morbs quip scoffing at this] so thoroughly eclipsed anything else in the Democratic party, like not just their mediocrity but their very existence... sometimes i'm like, who tf are these ppl

this is a relatively easy argument to get behind imho

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/democrats-should-propose-an-actual-middle-class-tax-cut.html

Democrats have every reason to make taxes one of their signature issues. Voters want the tax code to be simpler and fairer — which is to say, they want the middle class to pay less, the rich to pay more, and for everyone to spend less time on government-mandated paperwork.

Republicans cannot deliver these goods because they are beholden to interest groups that oppose them. The libertarian billionaires who shield the GOP from popular rebuke demand tribute. And those billionaires — along with tax-services companies — have an investment in keeping Americans confused and overwhelmed at tax time.

my purely in-it-to-win-it party name wd be Raise Taxes On Rich People

This seems interesting: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/30/15698378/house-democrats-pac

In days past, a proposal to slam the rich to reward the working and middle classes meant hitting Republicans to benefit Democrats.

Even as recently as 1976, according to data from American National Election Studies, the most affluent voters, the top 5 percent, were solidly in the Republican camp, 77-23. Those in the bottom third of the income distribution were solidly Democratic, 64-36.

In other words, 41 years ago, the year Jimmy Carter won the presidency, the Sanders (2016 tax) proposal would have made political sense.

But what about now?

In the 2016 election, the economic elite was essentially half Democratic, according to exit polls: Those in the top 10 percent of the income distribution voted 47 percent for Clinton and 46 percent for Trump. Half the voters Sanders would hit hardest are members of the party from which he sought the nomination.

The problem for the Democratic Party is that “them” has become “us.”...

Richard V. Reeves, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, highlights the contradictions of modern Democratic liberalism in his new book, “Dream Hoarders: How the Upper Middle Class is Leaving Everyone Else in the Dust.”

Reeves argues that those in the top 20 percent of the income distribution have become an increasingly isolated class; if the country is to restore the American tradition of upward mobility, this elite will have to pay for it....

The preliminary evidence from actual events is that demanding sacrifice poses major risks. Asking people to think of themselves as compassionate and to pay higher taxes is one thing — many Democrats have made that leap — but ask them to live in a mixed income neighborhood or ask them to have their kid give up her spot at Princeton, and you get a different response.

Reeves himself points to the Democratic uproar when President Obama proposed a relatively modest change in a tax-based mechanism to help pay college costs. The change in what are called 529 College Savings Plans was designed to make the program more advantageous to people with moderate incomes and less so for those with high incomes. An estimated 70 percent of the tax benefits of 529 plans currently go to families with incomes above $200,000.

The moment Obama suggested the reform, prominent Democrats from both the House and Senate were inundated with angry complaints from affluent constituents. They pressured Obama to drop the proposal. In less than a week, he did.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/opinion/democratic-party-rich-thomas-edsall.html?_r=0

Rich "liberals" who don't support desegregation, public schools, and progressive taxation should be driven out of the party. Fuck those people. I make a good living, but I'm happy to pay more taxes to support liberal ideals.

In the 2016 election, the economic elite was essentially half Democratic, according to exit polls: Those in the top 10 percent of the income distribution voted 47 percent for Clinton and 46 percent for Trump.

This part is total BS -- affluent highly-educated white people are still predominantly Republican, but they're the kind of Republicans who are least likely to support Donald Trump. Ask how they voted in house races and you're gonna get a very different answer.

Reeves argues that those in the top 20 percent of the income distribution have become an increasingly isolated class; if the country is to restore the American tradition of upward mobility, this elite will have to pay for it.

This part is kind of true; I see why it's politically effective to say "the 1% are making out like bandits while the 99% are getting screwed" but it's actually not just hedge fund bros who are doing fine, it's also the doctors, the lawyers, the rest of the top 10-20% of the income distribution.

The moment Obama suggested the reform, prominent Democrats from both the House and Senate were inundated with angry complaints from affluent constituents.

This part is 100% true and was a moment at which my fellow liberals were indeed supremely annoying.

now we just need to convince Dem officeholders

xp

i remember them being inundated w angry complaints from the public during the bailout fiasco but they conveniently ignored those

Spotted on Twitter:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DBfIAbkW0AI-3aq.jpg:large

I fear revivals of this thread more than the Trump one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2-jYsOCn1M

the "100% ideologically pure" myth makes me violent

so do Eagles clips

that post by unperson is precisely Jay Bulworth's "What're ya gonna do, vote Republican?"

Why dont you?

nader voter fight!

Lol

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o6gE8wG6tnFJC5g1G/giphy.gif

hey guys, that Sobering Advice for Lefties that unperson posted was from Seth MacFarlane.

Hey the guy whose job was making rape and Jew jokes on the worst cartoon ever has some atraight talk for the left https://t.co/RYaU4z3aCd

— Dan CO'Sullivfefe (@Bro_Pair) June 6, 2017

Seth MacFarlane > Dennis Perrin

the "100% ideologically pure" myth makes me violent

― Supercreditor (Dr Morbius), Sunday, June 4, 2017 10:06 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'll remember that the next time I see a "O LOOK JARED KUSHNER DONATED TO CORY BOOKER" post.

cool

Seth MacFarlane > Dennis Perrin

Only in terms of exposure and potential damage.

Liberals hate Trump because he's making socialism inevitable.

— Dennis Perrin (@DennisThePerrin) May 22, 2017

"inevitable"

"socialism"

"he's"

didja sell yr sense of humor at rummage, crut? DP knows America will chainsaw its balls off b4 it turns red.

"sense of humor"

"balls"

Dennis Perrin is the left's version of Andy Borowitz.

ah, "woke" "sexist" bullshit

xp

morbs i have no idea what you're reading into me quoting the word "balls"

Trying to make this thread anything other than a Morbius snark monopoly seems pointless

ok mea culpa Brad

let's all just chill and watch Get Out again

I donated $25 to the Quist campaign and ever since I've been getting 5 emails a day from the DCCC with the spammiest headlines possible. Bad look, Democrats.

let's all just chill and watch Get Out again

Done.

i'm saving it for Thanksgiving, not sure what year

Ossoff not down for single-payer, says no chance of passage. "We need a lot less ideology around health care." @WABENews @PBSAtlanta debate

— Alex Burns (@alexburnsNYT) June 8, 2017

I am, uh, not endorsing not going for single payer fwiw.

i like living in NY so i don't have to vote for invertebrates -- oh wait, Schumer

The House passed Dodd-Frank rollback legislation today, 233-186

Republicans 233-1
Democrats 0-185

^ Democrats gave it everything they've got with the usual result.

who was the one republican

Trying to make this thread anything other than a Morbius snark monopoly seems pointless

― El Tomboto

what if we try to make it morbius snark bingo

good thread by Adam J here

assumption the "Bernie slot" will be filled by a vaguely progressive dem & have 1-to-1 enthusiasm/money among demsocs is, i think, a bad one

— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) June 9, 2017

What the fuck does "we need a lot less ideology around healthcare" even mean? How do you even get to the point that there is some position to take on governmebt's role or lack of role in healthcare without ideology?

I feel like my snap assessment of him above was 100% correct.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/09/politics/kirsten-gillibrand-fbomb/index.html?sr=fbCNN060917kirsten-gillibrand-fbomb1100PMVODtopLink&linkId=38556943

I think this is the second time she has said "fuck" in public in the last few months. Is this an attempt to seem more candid and even like an "outsider" now that she knows voters like that stuff?