Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 hours ago, pyrohornIII said:

I'm interested in y'all's comments on this?  How widespread is this sentiment in your opinions?    How large a part of it is responsible for the disconnect between the working class and the party? 

Frankly at the heart of democracy is disagreement on many levels, but that works to move things along slowly towards a better society.  But I personally feel the scam of superdelegates to put Hillary in over Bernie was the point where people started shaping up this idea and reinforcing it with example after example.   

image.thumb.png.2f7438faa33c9a8c9231157bf8060a3a.png

This is overly simplistic, but does fairly describe a certain part of the Democratic establishment.  It's wrong on a few things, most notably the establishment's support for austerity. We've seen a huge shift away from austerity politics among establishment Dems since Obama's presidency. There's literally only a handful of elected Congressional Dems who might still buy in to the austerity shit, and that's because they're dumb enough to genuinely believe it's necessary, economically speaking.

The true part (and the part that's really at the heart of what's wrong with the party) is that it's a party of consultants and careerists (we could actually use more opportunists in the Democratic party). The consultants keep their status within the party by insisting on the importance of polls, focus groups, etc. to winning, and the careerists think the point of the party is a jobs program for good soldiers. Those who feel they've waited their turn react more negatively to someone they see as skipping the line than they do to anything Republicans do, because beating Republicans is secondary to maintaining their own place within the party.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
18 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

This is overly simplistic, but does fairly describe a certain part of the Democratic establishment.  It's wrong on a few things, most notably the establishment's support for austerity. We've seen a huge shift away from austerity politics among establishment Dems since Obama's presidency. There's literally only a handful of elected Congressional Dems who might still buy in to the austerity shit, and that's because they're dumb enough to genuinely believe it's necessary, economically speaking.

The true part (and the part that's really at the heart of what's wrong with the party) is that it's a party of consultants and careerists (we could actually use more opportunists in the Democratic party). The consultants keep their status within the party by insisting on the importance of polls, focus groups, etc. to winning, and the careerists think the point of the party is a jobs program for good soldiers. Those who feel they've waited their turn react more negatively to someone they see as skipping the line than they do to anything Republicans do, because beating Republicans is secondary to maintaining their own place within the party.

Maybe we should start by disqualifying anyone with an Ivy League degree, at least for a little bit.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

From my centrist buddy who votes Dem as of the last decade, but seems to hate doing it. 
 

Quote

Will be interesting to see what happens in the mid terms.  As an outsider, sure seems the liberals are shifting left rather than acknowledging the hard truths of why they are losing elections to these asshats.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

The Democratic Party is THE reason why I don't consider myself a Democrat.

But I have to vote for them because Republicans.

https://apple.news/AZXOGbN70SsWfVy6O61bkgQ

There’s plenty of people getting tired of both of their shit.  Just not organized and not enough money backing to make a difference with either.  

IMG_9914.jpeg

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

From my centrist buddy who votes Dem as of the last decade, but seems to hate doing it. 
 

 

This is where one of my cousins with whom I often differ politically stands, though he claims to be "libertarian."  He used to live in NYC, but now lives in rural PA.  He's freaking out about Mamdani, and going to the fallback of "Dems are too extreme, they're going to make it seem like all Dems are like Mamdami/AOC/the Squad.  Here's what I told him:

"Maybe the NY Republicans should try to figure out how they let it get this bad? How their party became so out of touch with the voters as to make the state effectively a one party state that then runs amuck with policies that push voters further to the left.  Maybe they need some introspection and to figure out where they have gone wrong to allow this democratic socialist to get elected." 

Which was fun to say.  At the same time, he's not wrong - the Republicans are very good at taking an anecdote and extrapolating it (extremely, I may add) to the entirety of all Dems everywhere.  It's what's got them hunting us in MN.  

Edited by Chad Fuck
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

Jimmy Fallon Comedy GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon

On 5/24/2025 at 9:24 AM, immamac said:

You also realize the Senate is gonna eviscerate this shit? I seriously doubt it passes anywhere close to what it is now. 

image.thumb.png.14c15e6c334f6d83f7e8776ea432543a.png

On 5/24/2025 at 1:37 PM, Gourmand said:

I don't know what makes you optimistic thereof; even if these fucking freaks rewrite the bill they will still do it at the expense of those most in need and for the benefit of the wealthiest 1%. This is a massive wealth transfer that will be rubber-stamped by the Senate because these so-called fiscal hawks will ultimately cave just like every goddamn Republican caves at the threat of being on the wrong side of Donald Trump.  

Edited by Gourmand
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

From my centrist buddy who votes Dem as of the last decade, but seems to hate doing it. 
 

Quote

Will be interesting to see what happens in the mid terms.  As an outsider, sure seems the liberals are shifting left rather than acknowledging the hard truths of why they are losing elections to these asshats.

 

In my lifetime I have seen civil rights, voting rights, women's rights and societal safety nets put in place over time that seemed to be a natural progression to a better society and a more just nation model.  Many of these we felt basically sacrosant, achievements hard fought for and enshrined.  I felt that the rest of the country was proud of our place in the world, leading by example when it came to self governance.  But little by little these things came under attack, and the whole Overton Window started creeping to the right.  Most didn't seem to pay attention to it too much, expecting some sort of morals check to come into play as it normally has.  But when Roe v. Wade was overturned things changed.  While the Dem party felt all the advances of the Great Society were firmly entrenched, they took for granted a loyal base, quit fighting for them altogether and started trying to defend every single small faction which in turn made them appear to be a narrow focused, elitist party. 

Our own TDP has recognized this and if you listen to the messages coming out of the new leadership you see them fighting to regain the trust of the working class, while also protecting the human rights of all, including the smaller factions that are under constant siege.  It is yet to be seen if this is possible, but certainly the old guard, comfortable Dems make it harder than it should be.  

TL;DR:  The Dems became complacent and fell asleep at the switch, underestimating the stupidity of many of the electorate.  While they were self assured all the social advances were impregnable, they weren't and now so many of those advances they are trying to save and restore are considered "too leftist."  The party in Texas is trying to self correct, but is it too little too late?  It's a big ass ship and it's going to take time to alter course.

Edited by pyrohornIII
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
56 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

From my centrist buddy who votes Dem as of the last decade, but seems to hate doing it
 

 

I know plenty of guys like this and I've given up arguing with them about the perceived leftward shift. It's not a useful assessment of anything, it's always either (or both) (1) performative independence (dudes love this shit), and/or (2) ignorance based on a poor media diet and an inability to understand how media focus and framing affects an audience's perception.  

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted
Just now, Brian Fantana said:

Anyone who calls themselves a centrist nowadays is not a serious person, or they just really love Joe Biden for some reason, but one hand feeds the other.

I’ve found it’s people who want the Rs to be more “80s conservative” so they can vote for them, but know they can’t vote for dotard. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Biff Tannen said:

I’ve found it’s people who want the Rs to be more “80s conservative” so they can vote for them, but know they can’t vote for dotard. 

Anecdotally for me, it's mostly liberals that really bought into the need to court the mythical disgruntled Republican voter that Kamala went after and blame every marginalized group for her loss, despite the fact that the main reason she lost was white male voters that voted for Biden staying home. 

They're convinced you have to appeal to all the different types of shitheads because we "need their votes" despite the fact that none of those people are ever voting for a Democratic candidate in a million years.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted

Dems could run a Bill Clinton Dem again, the right would call him a commie socialist, and "centrists" would be very concerned how far left he is.  People's brains are cooked. Again, the game is rigged. Have to excite the youths and people who don't typically vote and stop trying to appease the middle.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Dems could run a Bill Clinton Dem again, the right would call him a commie socialist, and "centrists" would be very concerned how far left he is.  People's brains are cooked. Again, the game is rigged. Have to excite the youths and people who don't typically vote and stop trying to appease the middle.

 

That's apparently where Mamdani has succeeded and has all those consultants, pollsters and talking heads thinking up in arms.

Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Dems could run a Bill Clinton Dem again, the right would call him a commie socialist, and "centrists" would be very concerned how far left he is.  People's brains are cooked. Again, the game is rigged. Have to excite the youths and people who don't typically vote and stop trying to appease the middle.

 

100% THIS

Fox News and the right wing propaganda machine has so thoroughly brainwashed the collective political consciousness and worked the corporate "liberal" media so effectively since the early 90s that the dipshits who call themselves centrists have convinced themselves it's  The Left that is wildly out of control and obsessed with pushing LatinX trans women in sports and not the insane right-wing Christofascists returning us to the 1850s.

The only thing that matters now is being a principled pugilist not afraid of being called a socialist/commie/marxist/pedophle. That's the GOP's only gameplan and the way to beat them is to smash them in the fucking face. That's what the people respond to.

Edited by Gourmand
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted

Today's Democratic leadership are basically 90s republicans in disguise.

 

Fuck right off Jeffries/Schumer/Pelosi. If Mamdani's last name was Smith they'd be hailing him as the second coming of FDR.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

From my centrist buddy who votes Dem as of the last decade, but seems to hate doing it. 
 

 

 

Your buddy has been duped

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Chult86 said:

Today's Democratic leadership are basically 90s republicans in disguise.

 

Fuck right off Jeffries/Schumer/Pelosi. If Mamdani's last name was Smith they'd be hailing him as the second coming of FDR.

They may be spineless, feckless and terrible communicators but there is only one political party that is bringing you masked police, citizenship de-naturalization, erosion of due process, tariffs, and the like. 
Many have fallen for the false equivalency lie.  I guess if Trump cancelled the mid terms some people would still be bitching about the democrats. 

Edited by CTC2
  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 2
Posted
46 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Dems could run a Bill Clinton Dem again, the right would call him a commie socialist, and "centrists" would be very concerned how far left he is.  People's brains are cooked. Again, the game is rigged. Have to excite the youths and people who don't typically vote and stop trying to appease the middle.

 

image.png.164ccdf16b4ac71c795ffa6d29f795a3.png

Posted
19 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

They may be spineless, feckless and terrible communicators but there is only one political party that is bringing you masked police, citizenship de-naturalization, erosion of due process, tariffs, and the like. 
Many have fallen for the false equivalency lie.  I guess if Trump cancelled the mid terms some people would still be bitching about the democrats. 

There is broadly no equivalency, but Democratic leadership is absolute trash and has no direction other than whatever they can say to sell their books. They don't give a shit what the Republicans are doing for the most part.

Mamdani's win has exposed a lot of the racist rot that is pervasive in the Democratic party that a whole lot of people love to pretend isn't there because the Republicans are just open about it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

There is broadly no equivalency, but Democratic leadership is absolute trash and has no direction other than whatever they can say to sell their books. They don't give a shit what the Republicans are doing for the most part.

Mamdani's win has exposed a lot of the racist rot that is pervasive in the Democratic party that a whole lot of people love to pretend isn't there because the Republicans are just open about it.

Yes, the democrats are definitely responsible for everything bad that is happening. They should be held accountable for all of these terrible Trump policies.  By all means, stop voting for them.  Things will definitely be better if they don’t ever gain power. 
Just like those Muslim Americans in Dearborn. They definitely had the right idea. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

They may be spineless, feckless and terrible communicators but there is only one political party that is bringing you masked police, citizenship de-naturalization, erosion of due process, tariffs, and the like. 
Many have fallen for the false equivalency lie.  I guess if Trump cancelled the mid terms some people would still be bitching about the democrats. 

You forgot to include in your face racism perpetuated by that party’s standard bearer.

Posted
2 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

Yes, the democrats are definitely responsible for everything bad that is happening. They should be held accountable for all of these terrible Trump policies.  By all means, stop voting for them.  Things will definitely be better if they don’t ever gain power. 
Just like those Muslim Americans in Dearborn. They definitely had the right idea. 

He never said anything about not voting for Dems or not wanting them in power. Do better. 

 

Posted
Just now, CTC2 said:

Yes, the democrats are definitely responsible for everything bad that is happening. They should be held accountable for all of these terrible Trump policies.  By all means, stop voting for them.  Things will definitely be better if they don’t ever gain power. 
Just like those Muslim Americans in Dearborn. They definitely had the right idea. 

That isn't at all what I said, psycho. Take your fucking meds.

You can both understand that the Republicans are doing absolutely heinous shit and be critical of Democratic party leadership.

Thanks for making it easy on me and immediately exposing yourself as precisely the type of racist dipshit within the party that I'm being critical of, though. 

Let's find out what other groups you want to blame [that aren't white men] for Kamala's loss, though. Just let it all out.

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

He never said anything about not voting for Dems or not wanting them in power. Do better. 

 

My comment was satire on the whole the Dem’s are shit sentiment that I hear all too often.  Why are people even wasting their breath on this crap with everything going on?

Sorry I didn’t get it down on your level. I’ll do better next time. 

Edited by CTC2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

That isn't at all what I said, psycho. Take your fucking meds.

You can both understand that the Republicans are doing absolutely heinous shit and be critical of Democratic party leadership.

Thanks for making it easy on me and immediately exposing yourself as precisely the type of racist dipshit within the party that I'm being critical of, though. 

Let's find out what other groups you want to blame [that aren't white men] for Kamala's loss, though. Just let it all out.

See my post below. Sorry it triggered you. 

Posted
1 minute ago, CTC2 said:

Why are people even wasting their breath on this crap with everything going on?

You mean why are we being critical of Democratic leadership when they are doing basically nothing to combat anything the Republicans are doing? Gee whiz, I can't possibly imagine.

The Democratic party is being the loudest it has been since the election, but their ire is directed at the NYC Democratic mayoral nominee and not the party that's actively destroying our country, that ought to clue you in at least a little bit.

Don't give me that "I was joking" crap, you're just being the actual problem and don't want to admit it to yourself.

Posted
Just now, Brian Fantana said:

You mean why are we being critical of Democratic leadership when they are doing basically nothing to combat anything the Republicans are doing? Gee whiz, I can't possibly imagine.

The Democratic party is being the loudest it has been since the election, but their ire is directed at the NYC Democratic mayoral nominee and not the party that's actively destroying our country, that ought to clue you in at least a little bit.

To do something you have to have power. They have none. 
I am terribly unhappy about Dem leadership. But, that goes back years. 
My larger point is that despite the moral depravity, self dealing, and possibly tyrannical shit being visited upon us by the R’s, it just seems so irrelevant to me. 

Posted

The left/right shifts are meaningless unless you are talking specific issues.  In general, I think any shift to the left on any policy is attributed to the Dems, even if neither the main party nor a Presidential candidate pushes it. Where the dems have pulled to the right, it reflects a shift in the country or a push by a few dems or liberal groups.  So, the Dems aren't setting the agenda in either situation. 

LBGTQIA+ (etc.) --The dems have definitely shifted left.  In 2008, civil unions in lieu of gay marriage was the party line.  Trans rights?  Not even on the radar.  The Dems shifted because it was the right position to have, and frankly America as a whole shifted.  There is no shifting back, thankfully. 

Black Lives Matter (police brutality) - There really isn't a policy here and I think the Dem organization as a whole has ducked the issue.  But, individual dems and affiliated groups have definitely signaled a willingness to reign in cops.  So, it is frequently seen as a shift with the Democrats.  

DEI/race issues - Again, it's pretty light on policies.  I think the Minority-Owned/Women-owned contractor policies have existed in federal contracting for a while, generally with bipartisan support.  (That's a guess, since it doesn't typically get argued about.). The bigger shift left has been in corporate America, not anything driven by the Democratic Party.  

Gun Control - The dems have definitely shifted to the right.  Shit, I remember when there was meaningful debate about controlling hand guns. Now, shooting trophies seems to be a benefit for being a VP nom.  The Democrats have crumbled on this issue.  Maybe that reflects the direction the country has gone, despite the frequent murder of children. 

Tax /Trade Policy - Yeah, shifted way right. 

Support for Israel - unchanged, maybe a bit to the right over the last 30 years.  But there are enough individual Dems and associated groups that have pushed back on Israel, so it creates the appearance of a shift in the Dem party.  

Health Care - on the whole, not really changed since Hillary Clinton in the early 90s.  The difference is that Obama actually got something set up. At this point, it seems like Dems are consolidating the support for Obamacare, but no wide-spread push for a better system.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, CTC2 said:

To do something you have to have power. They have none. 

The Tea Party began while the republicans had no power. The policy differences between the GOP and the Democrats are clear to anyone paying attention, although Kamala ran to the right to try and close that gap.

If you set those differences aside, are the parties any different? Yes, actually.

The GOP actually wants to accomplish the things its base wants accomplished and is willing to do anything to deliver.

The Democrats have never, not once, in my entire life actually wanted to accomplish anything its left-of-center base wants accomplished.

Exhibit 64,973,651 (but who's counting):

Yes I fucking hate Fetterman, but he got hit with the stroke gun and can't avoid saying the quiet parts out loud.

Make no mistake, the entire party feels the same way as he does.

It's hard to win a war when one side is busy running up the score as long as the other side refuses to acknowledge there's a war going on.

Edited by chainsaw
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

That is…optimistic. 

I think the Dems lose more they gain if they start backing off something like gay marriage.  Again, this isn't the Dem leadership deciding how to change the world; the world changed and the Dems are reacting.  Unless our culture shifts back enough, supporting gay rights will remain part of any path to winning. It's hard to imagine culture shifting back that much quickly, but, as they say, "nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition."   

Posted
4 minutes ago, Tuco said:

I think the Dems lose more they gain if they start backing off something like gay marriage.  Again, this isn't the Dem leadership deciding how to change the world; the world changed and the Dems are reacting.  Unless our culture shifts back enough, supporting gay rights will remain part of any path to winning. It's hard to imagine culture shifting back that much quickly, but, as they say, "nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition."   

I meant that Rs will reverse gay marriage as soon as possible. Probably will wait to see if (when) they retain power in 2028, by whatever means. But once that happens, look out gays. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The Democrats have never, not once, in my entire life actually wanted to accomplish anything its left-of-center base wants accomplished.

I mean, what little movement there has actually been on climate change has been entirely because of the Dems. And was Obamacare just nothing?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I mean, what little movement there has actually been on climate change has been entirely because of the Dems. And was Obamacare just nothing?

Yes. Obamacare was a half measure.

Maybe you're too young to remember George HW Bush. No doubt his party has a worse track record on climate, but there actually has been bipartisan "movement" on that front in my lifetime.

Posted

Of course, W and Trump have wiped all that movement away, so it's moot, but technically the Dems can't get 100% of the credit for the now-mooted few steps in the right direction on that issue.

Posted
7 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

This is where one of my cousins with whom I often differ politically stands, though he claims to be "libertarian."  He used to live in NYC, but now lives in rural PA.  He's freaking out about Mamdani, and going to the fallback of "Dems are too extreme, they're going to make it seem like all Dems are like Mamdami/AOC/the Squad.  Here's what I told him:

"Maybe the NY Republicans should try to figure out how they let it get this bad? How their party became so out of touch with the voters as to make the state effectively a one party state that then runs amuck with policies that push voters further to the left.  Maybe they need some introspection and to figure out where they have gone wrong to allow this democratic socialist to get elected." 

Which was fun to say.  At the same time, he's not wrong - the Republicans are very good at taking an anecdote and extrapolating it (extremely, I may add) to the entirety of all Dems everywhere.  It's what's got them hunting us in MN.  

Republicans are going to vote Republican no matter who or what.  Democrats won't.  Agree though regarding the establishment.  More than leading, they want to continue their status quo of being anointed by party figure heads, rather than elected.  Till then, it's rigged toward the establishment. But they're already losing, especially when it mattered, now do the right thing and step aside.  Once you lose, take your think tank and staff and hit the bricks. 

  • Like 1
Posted
7 hours ago, pyrohornIII said:

In my lifetime I have seen civil rights, voting rights, women's rights and societal safety nets put in place over time that seemed to be a natural progression to a better society and a more just nation model.  Many of these we felt basically sacrosant, achievements hard fought for and enshrined.  I felt that the rest of the country was proud of our place in the world, leading by example when it came to self governance.  But little by little these things came under attack, and the whole Overton Window started creeping to the right.  Most didn't seem to pay attention to it too much, expecting some sort of morals check to come into play as it normally has.  But when Roe v. Wade was overturned things changed.  While the Dem party felt all the advances of the Great Society were firmly entrenched, they took for granted a loyal base, quit fighting for them altogether and started trying to defend every single small faction which in turn made them appear to be a narrow focused, elitist party. 

Our own TDP has recognized this and if you listen to the messages coming out of the new leadership you see them fighting to regain the trust of the working class, while also protecting the human rights of all, including the smaller factions that are under constant siege.  It is yet to be seen if this is possible, but certainly the old guard, comfortable Dems make it harder than it should be.  

TL;DR:  The Dems became complacent and fell asleep at the switch, underestimating the stupidity of many of the electorate.  While they were self assured all the social advances were impregnable, they weren't and now so many of those advances they are trying to save and restore are considered "too leftist."  The party in Texas is trying to self correct, but is it too little too late?  It's a big ass ship and it's going to take time to alter course.

They built a reliable power structure and stopped working for the middle class.  Happens, especially when the leadership is no longer middle class but benefits from tax cuts and deregulation--Congresscritters have insider trading, so it affects them less if at all.  Vote people with skin in the game and vote out careerists.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and knowing you've been on top becomes an expectation, rather than a lunchpail mentality.  

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Dems could run a Bill Clinton Dem again, the right would call him a commie socialist, and "centrists" would be very concerned how far left he is.  People's brains are cooked. Again, the game is rigged. Have to excite the youths and people who don't typically vote and stop trying to appease the middle.

 

Excite how, like take away their loan repayment teaching programs, reinstate predatory loans for those that paid off the principle several times over, reduce financial aid and grants, destroy universities and programs that rely on research, which in turn reduces the need for researchers, doctors and scientists?  What more convincing can students and the young possibly need?  Ah, I know, we need yet another global epidemic and this time, only have the clowns in charge. 

Edited by Mdhorn
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Tuco said:

The left/right shifts are meaningless unless you are talking specific issues.  In general, I think any shift to the left on any policy is attributed to the Dems, even if neither the main party nor a Presidential candidate pushes it. Where the dems have pulled to the right, it reflects a shift in the country or a push by a few dems or liberal groups.  So, the Dems aren't setting the agenda in either situation. 

LBGTQIA+ (etc.) --The dems have definitely shifted left.  In 2008, civil unions in lieu of gay marriage was the party line.  Trans rights?  Not even on the radar.  The Dems shifted because it was the right position to have, and frankly America as a whole shifted.  There is no shifting back, thankfully. 

Black Lives Matter (police brutality) - There really isn't a policy here and I think the Dem organization as a whole has ducked the issue.  But, individual dems and affiliated groups have definitely signaled a willingness to reign in cops.  So, it is frequently seen as a shift with the Democrats.  

DEI/race issues - Again, it's pretty light on policies.  I think the Minority-Owned/Women-owned contractor policies have existed in federal contracting for a while, generally with bipartisan support.  (That's a guess, since it doesn't typically get argued about.). The bigger shift left has been in corporate America, not anything driven by the Democratic Party.  

Gun Control - The dems have definitely shifted to the right.  Shit, I remember when there was meaningful debate about controlling hand guns. Now, shooting trophies seems to be a benefit for being a VP nom.  The Democrats have crumbled on this issue.  Maybe that reflects the direction the country has gone, despite the frequent murder of children. 

Tax /Trade Policy - Yeah, shifted way right. 

Support for Israel - unchanged, maybe a bit to the right over the last 30 years.  But there are enough individual Dems and associated groups that have pushed back on Israel, so it creates the appearance of a shift in the Dem party.  

Health Care - on the whole, not really changed since Hillary Clinton in the early 90s.  The difference is that Obama actually got something set up. At this point, it seems like Dems are consolidating the support for Obamacare, but no wide-spread push for a better system.  

NM--see tax/trade policy.  

Edited by Mdhorn


×
×
  • Create New...