Democratic (Party) Direction

christ https://t.co/OFdojTyPKn pic.twitter.com/CPFFU9CQ6s

— ryan cooper (@ryanlcooper) July 19, 2017

because that worked out so well last time

as you all know I find HamNo's look-at-me writing style to be indigestible but I agreed with most of his points in this

http://fusion.kinja.com/democrats-wake-up-and-smell-the-failure-1797015279

They mistake weakness for pragmatism. They mistake pandering for savvy. They always seem to imagine that the closer they edge to Republican policy positions, the more votes they will inevitably capture, due to math. They—the establishment, the ones in control, with all of the plugs plugged into the current power grid—are unable to imagine a world in which they lead voters to their side with bold, progressive policies, and by telling the truth. That is considered hopelessly unrealistic, by the circle of operatives that helped to lose to Donald Trump. The entire apparatus of Democratic operatives who spent decades accumulating power, riding their way up through the Bill Clinton and Obama administrations, are still there. And they did their best in 2016. And here we are.

Anyway, to Shakey: Having no leaders of the opposition party, except in the managerial or tactical sense (which is not leadership), is probably responsible for more horrible problems in our democracy than we maybe want to admit. It guarantees at least four years of rudderless bitching and being dragged around from one carefully curated echo chamber to another by barely competent consultants who sustain their mortgage payments by keeping the country in perpetual 51-49 deadlock.

There is no Labour Manifesto to speak of for the Democrats, other than the 2016 Platform, but since that campaign "lost" the election by negative 3 points, those planks are of no interest to the grossly overmatched hacks still running the DCCC, and they're just one egregious example. There's nobody to lead on anything more than cussing in public about how we want to help people. Well and we have a guy who lost in the primaries to the "most unpopular candidate ever" who isn't even a Democrat.

right, he's a communist, as Ms Popularity all but said out loud repeatedly

btw

The former secretary of state has always been a polarizing figure, but this survey shows she’s even lost popularity among those who voted for her in November.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-18/finally-a-poll-trump-will-like-clinton-even-more-unpopular

nobody likes a loser

dems vomit out shitty slogans because they can't name that which is afflicting people's lives without upsetting their rolodex of donors.

— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) July 20, 2017

What city is Adam Johnson from?

it's right there in his display name

H.

Here's your chance, Dems. Now! Let us all watch as you fuck it up in the most spectacular fashion.

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/342867-poll-majority-says-federal-government-should-ensure-healthcare-coverage

More AHJ content
https://youtu.be/17Csy9m1BFM

I thought I would hate this, but ended up kinda digging the idea:
https://newrepublic.com/article/143602/back-work-how-democrats-win-americans-left-behind-new-economy

I also support a UBI, but this seems more palatable to Americans, while still having enough of a think-big element to seem inspiring.

jfc, ALEC wants to repeal 17th amendment

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/41307-trump-team-alec-koch-industries-debate-gerrymandering-the-us-senate-in-denver

Centrist Dems smeared Keith Ellison as a scary Muslim to keep him from getting the DNC job. Let's see how their guy Tom Perez is doing pic.twitter.com/JiR19uYZgq

— christopher (@SpectatorCitizn) July 21, 2017

Good tweet there, guy

Tom Perez as a regular old centrist
Keith Ellison as a guy who isn't Perez's #2 at DNC
Fundraising as most important activity for Dems to be doing

"Centrist Dems smeared him as a scary Muslim" is such a blatant lie. It's almost like people like him are a huge part of the problem.

Also

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2017/07/24/does-the-opening-predict-a-wave/

So basically that guy's an idiot who hates Dems that aren't him

If only we had a few more of his sort around

the party is being led by effectively nobody.

otm. Clinton is entirely off the leader board. Sanders has some media presence, but no clear power base. Pelosi has taken a step back from taking the lead. Warren has not grabbed the reins. The nearest thing to a national party leader atm would be... Chuck Schumer. (morbs gags audibly and justifiably)

I think they're all trying - its kind of hard to get any space in the media these days.

If you want to see who is vying for party leadership just check the list of guests on Pod Save America.

I don't care if "a better deal" could use "a catchier slogan" tbf - although why we're still talking about "deals" on both sides on the Atlantic come 2017 is its own epistemic problem, imo

the "deal" presumes some kind of game between parties whose interests aren't entirely mutual, when the continued existence of humanity, in a healthy and fulfilling environment, seems like something we should all be in favor of. Let's not make any more fucking deals. Let's have a better fucking way of life.

"Better deal" is so stupid bc Trump already claims to make the best deals

Democrats 2018: Liberté, Equalité, Beyonce

yeah so all that said can we move on to the planks

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/07/better-deal-far-democrats-moved-far-need-go

E Pluribus Unum = what's in it for me?

xxp

presumes some kind of game between parties whose interests aren't entirely mutual

imagine

Right now millions of unemployed or underemployed people, particularly those without a college degree, could be brought back into the labor force or retrained to secure full-time, higher-paying work. We propose giving employers, particularly small businesses, a large tax credit to train workers for unfilled jobs. This will have particular resonance in smaller cities and rural areas, which have experienced an exodus of young people who aren’t trained for the jobs in those areas.

it's 15$ by 2024 which inflation adjusted is the same as hillarys 12$, but money illusion is real so 15$ ppl will be appeased (and tbh, it was prob intentional on activists part to set it high with knowledge that it would take better part of a decade to pass)

infrastructure good, seems like a esp good one to beat Trump with given his empty promises on it

i find Matt Stoller really annoying and Loomis is prob right that antitrust is likely too boring, but in areas like telecoms and healthcare there's some low hanging fruit, and antitrust is already bipartisan and an easy sell to Americans

tax credits for retraining; something like this should prob exist, but the devil's in the details. ideally you wanna strike the right balance between wasting tax expenditure on hires that would've happened anyways and incentivizing those that don't; something like setting the subsidy proportional to unemployment (or 1 - prime age epop) in the commuting zone and having it phase out with firm size

They always seem to imagine that the closer they edge to Republican policy positions, the more votes they will inevitably capture, due to math.

The Democratic party of 2017 embraces an end to mass incarceration, free higher education, legalized marijuana, and civil rights for both gay people (which even Republicans have come to grudgingly accept) and trans people. It has made extreme income inequality into something people see as an injustice instead of the God-given order of things.

I mean I'm not saying they're political masterminds but I don't think they're moderate Republicans. I think their failures are largely structural and tactical; focusing too little on state legislatures, which creates a situation where there aren't enough seasoned Dem candidates to run for U.S. office, and which allows state law to bit by bit put money in the hands of organized groups that donate to and campaign for the GOP, keep money out of the hands of organized groups that donate to and campaign for Democrats.

how are any of their policy ideas actually going to make a serious dent in income inequality?

how the fuck do you even make a serious dent on income inequality at this point?

not with any measures Dems will go for that's for damn sure

yeah let me know how many silicon valley VCs or corporate big law dudes will take a 75% upper tax bracket

fart fart fart small business fart fart factory workers fart fart fart fart tweaks to employer-based health care fart fart fart trump 2020

yeah let me know how many silicon valley VCs or corporate big law dudes will take a 75% upper tax bracket

oh, I definitely agree.

yeah let me know how many silicon valley VCs or corporate big law dudes will take a 75% upper tax bracket

oh, I definitely agree.

pay it or go to prison

how the fuck do you even make a serious dent on income inequality at this point?

A financial transactions tax on Wall Street trades would be a start. More high tax brackets on income, up to 75%. Ending easy shell companies based in the USA. New currency controls. Increasing the tax on capital gains over $10 million. Bigger estate taxes on estates over, say, $25 million. Changing how credits, deductions and exemptions are handled on high income returns.

The trick is to target the upper 5% and inflict just the right amount of pain at each level of wealth, so that the decision to move to some other lower tax country involves too much personal disruption and sacrifice to be worth it.

again I just can see Dems ever doing the majority of those things, even the modest ones, soooo

100% estate tax and guillotines?

sounds p good right now

100% estate tax and guillotines?

sounds p good right now

― a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.)

hey, you know how a top ilx pastime right now is looking back on stuff we said a year ago for morbid yuks?

it's only a morbid yuk if it comes true and that'll take a lot more than a year I'd expect

“A Better Deal: Better Jobs, Better Wages, Better Future”

wow with a slogan this good they don't even need policies.

better future? where do i donate my money?

i like better future!

Yeah Schumer said the other day "we're not going to include any policies at all so don't bother looking it up, we're just going to use a slogan only" me and the people online I get my news from were all really upset about it.

they should try to pass a bill stripping healthcare from elected representatives i bet that would be extraordinarily popular

Isn't it Better Skills Better Jobs Better Wages?

was there just the op-ed in the NYT or somewhere more official to see a fuller slate of things?

the policy aspects that came along with the new slogan were: $15 minimum wage, increased antitrust activity (believe that when I see it) and negotiating for lower prescription drugs (lol that went out the window immediately during ACA)