Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

imagine2015

(2,054 posts)
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:01 PM May 2016

Chomsky: The Majority of Today's Elected Democrats Are Moderate Republicans



Election 2016
Chomsky: The Majority of Today's Elected Democrats Are Moderate Republicans
According to Chomsky, America is a two-party state, "but there's only one faction."
By Alexandra Rosenmann / AlterNet
May 13, 2016


The majority of Democrats have shifted to the right so far that the two-party system is almost unrecognizable, according to Noam Chomsky.

"There used to be a quip that the United States was a one-party state with a business party that had two factions: the Democrats and Republicans—and that used to be pretty accurate, but it’s not anymore. The U.S. is still a two-party state, but there’s only one faction, and it’s not Democrats, it’s moderate Republicans. Today’s Democrats have shifted to the right," Chomsky told RT America's Anissa Naouai.

And apparently, so have the Republicans.

According to Chomsky, "[Political scientist] Norman Ornstein simply describes the Republican Party today as a 'radical insurgency that doesn’t care about fact, doesn’t care about argument, doesn’t want to participate in politics, and is simply off the spectrum.'"



http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/chomsky-todays-democrats-are-moderate-republicans
199 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Chomsky: The Majority of Today's Elected Democrats Are Moderate Republicans (Original Post) imagine2015 May 2016 OP
Then Chomsky can feel free to start his own party that reflects his views. This isn't rocket science Trust Buster May 2016 #1
...or the moderate Republicans can start their own party n/t leftstreet May 2016 #2
We won. You and Chomsky are the ones complaining. Figure it out. Trust Buster May 2016 #4
"you" keep winning lower voter turnout. Some victory n/t leftstreet May 2016 #6
We will not budge. Chomsky and friends need to understand that. Trust Buster May 2016 #7
LOL leftstreet May 2016 #9
The arrogance of those that side with the billionaires. rhett o rick May 2016 #180
Then the D Party will go the way of the Rs, i.e., we will take it over and then KPN May 2016 #129
Stay the course. frylock May 2016 #168
Nope, you will not awoke_in_2003 May 2016 #198
Who won? imagine2015 May 2016 #15
"we?" Are you a moderate republican? cyberswede May 2016 #48
By her answer I assume she is. HooptieWagon May 2016 #59
On the basis of that post and others she's made, yes. closeupready May 2016 #89
Isn't that position SwankyXomb May 2016 #105
It was, until Hillary became the front-runner, more or less. closeupready May 2016 #117
Yes indeed. arikara May 2016 #158
Probably not very moderate. frylock May 2016 #170
Last I checked... Else You Are Mad May 2016 #151
All you won is the probable fracture and destruction of the party and the country. Some win. FighttheFuture May 2016 #166
Yes, moderate Republicans have won. frylock May 2016 #167
"We won" Well, thanks for admitting it Scootaloo May 2016 #174
Don't spend those "winnings," they may be confiscated and your candidate may be shown the door. leveymg May 2016 #178
Hahaha! Bangbangdem May 2016 #188
So I take it you agree with his analysis. imagine2015 May 2016 #11
Glad to see that at least one person acknowledges RoccoR5955 May 2016 #18
And the consequences of that will likely be a choice between floriduck May 2016 #119
And by "coup d'etat" you mean "people elected by Democrats"? brooklynite May 2016 #126
Don't tell us you... ReRe May 2016 #145
WHEN doesn't matter.... brooklynite May 2016 #149
We're doing that right now. :-) eom ReRe May 2016 #154
Not going so well, hmm? brooklynite May 2016 #159
I think Bernie is doing swimmingly. ReRe May 2016 #164
Just because they have been selected in an election RoccoR5955 May 2016 #192
"It can be carried on by lying to the constituents..." brooklynite May 2016 #193
No, I am not saying that I am smarter RoccoR5955 May 2016 #194
Time for loyal center/right Democrats that own the party to throw Chomsky under the bus Feeling the Bern May 2016 #71
+1 for speaking truth. leeroysphitz May 2016 #90
I was planning to just ignore him, as I always do. brooklynite May 2016 #177
Yep. . .party over principle. Join the Party then you can criticize it Feeling the Bern May 2016 #186
In our winner take all Democracy, a third party doesn't have a chance fasttense May 2016 #87
The So called Democrats won the right to rule over the Democratic Party All in it together May 2016 #104
... or the moderate republicans can move back to the republican party arikara May 2016 #156
DURec leftstreet May 2016 #3
given this kind of tripe, Noam Trotsky's place on this board ericson00 May 2016 #5
"Our party"? Do you have as much influence and control as big business and Wall Street in the party imagine2015 May 2016 #12
I think the "Our Party" refers to the elite few who own it. zeemike May 2016 #20
.+1 840high May 2016 #64
Your red-baiting is so last century. And off base, besides. Redwoods Red May 2016 #19
Define "our." As it currently exists, it has left me. nt SusanCalvin May 2016 #27
! Phlem May 2016 #33
"Noam Trotsky"? sylvanus May 2016 #43
You are always true to form, Senator McCarthy. nt villager May 2016 #45
NSA Much? billhicks76 May 2016 #55
give me a break. If a corporatist faction of the Democratic Party AntiBank May 2016 #56
Wow. Alkene May 2016 #88
Nice red-baiting, there. Odin2005 May 2016 #93
Oh FUCK, GET OUT OF THE 1980s, man. HughBeaumont May 2016 #99
He's attacking Republicans who call themselves Democrats. Ikonoklast May 2016 #107
Obama himself said his policies are that of 1980's republicans. arcane1 May 2016 #127
Spoken like a true Republican FauxNews fanatic. KPN May 2016 #130
Erik Erickson posts again on DU. n/t brentspeak May 2016 #152
Yes the ideals of democracy are subordinate to... Beartracks May 2016 #157
He is expressing Truth to Power. I pity you that that concept is so foreign to you. FighttheFuture May 2016 #169
.. frylock May 2016 #171
Wake up and smell the divided "our party". The leadership of "our party" has been rhett o rick May 2016 #185
Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along... coffeeAM May 2016 #8
This video describes it better... Xolodno May 2016 #10
It's about time someone said it. onecaliberal May 2016 #13
A lot of people have been trying to tell and say that or have even many times already said it nolabels May 2016 #38
I've said it many times here as well and yes it's obvious but no one in the media or onecaliberal May 2016 #70
Sort of like when a lot of the younger people told the party we want more than one choice nolabels May 2016 #76
More commonly known as "The Rahm Effect." :-( eom ReRe May 2016 #148
He's 100% right lastone May 2016 #14
Hi11ary is just not an option. chervilant May 2016 #21
I wish I felt I could afford that. SusanCalvin May 2016 #29
Yeah, well, I live in a very Republican state. chervilant May 2016 #68
First time I'm actually glad to reside in a red state. ...I don't have to vote for the flip side of SammyWinstonJack May 2016 #86
Isn't it about integrity of ones self or not to let Trump get the go. Pretty hard decision. bkkyosemite May 2016 #139
Real moderate Repubs would balk at the "Global Cop" wars, however. cprise May 2016 #78
Good point dreamnightwind May 2016 #191
Chomsky is just sore the majority of Democrats are reformists, not ideologues Albertoo May 2016 #16
And according to your chart zeemike May 2016 #23
+1 and it is ironic that Mbrow May 2016 #32
you seem to forget Obama came to power under the great Recession of 2007-8 Albertoo May 2016 #41
That is the fucking attitude that got us here. SkyIsGrey May 2016 #113
That effin attitude is called Obama's common sense Albertoo May 2016 #143
A pretty shitty "recovery"!! FighttheFuture May 2016 #172
Obama did a pretty good job Albertoo May 2016 #187
Today's mainstream Democrats have no interest in fair wages, health care for all or dflprincess May 2016 #30
unfortunately you are spot on nt AntiBank May 2016 #35
Believe me, it doesn't make me happy to say it dflprincess May 2016 #40
You're damn right it can be done. ReRe May 2016 #147
Says who? Albertoo May 2016 #42
Says a lack of action by mainstream Democrats. They don't even talk about these issues dflprincess May 2016 #49
So why did they fight for minimum wage increases and the ACA? CrowCityDem May 2016 #57
Does the ACA go far enough. runaway hero May 2016 #100
The question wasn't whether it 'was enough'... CrowCityDem May 2016 #106
You have to ask for the sky in those types of negotiations. runaway hero May 2016 #108
Pray tell me, how could you get Lieberman, et al, to vote for single payer? The public option? CrowCityDem May 2016 #109
I would have pushed harder for the public option. runaway hero May 2016 #111
In other words, you would have yelled more, and gotten the same result. CrowCityDem May 2016 #114
They fought for the ACA because it was a way to make sure the insurance cartels remain in Gene Debs May 2016 #122
Fight that we can't win? KPN May 2016 #136
Yes, there are fights we can't win. CrowCityDem May 2016 #141
That's the story line both parties have spinned for several decades now KPN May 2016 #199
Do you remember the words "Single payer is off the table?" Doremus May 2016 #155
ACA doesn't help anyone but private insurers Matrosov May 2016 #160
Listen to yourself... CrowCityDem May 2016 #162
Affording coverage is not the same as affording care, as all too many of these feel-good Gene Debs May 2016 #183
Reforming!! sylvanus May 2016 #47
Show me a system working better than capitalist social-democracy Albertoo May 2016 #63
Nope. It's fertilizer redstateblues May 2016 #79
Bullshit. BillZBubb May 2016 #80
Well, would you call Chomsky a mainstream Democrat? Albertoo May 2016 #81
KnR. If MLK, FDR, and Jesus agreed with Chomsky.... chknltl May 2016 #17
FDR believed in capitalism and Jesus is mostly a myth Albertoo May 2016 #46
I rest my case. chknltl May 2016 #51
FDR did not believe in unrestrained capitalism dflprincess May 2016 #52
The Economic Bill of Rights is pretty much what I initially stated Albertoo May 2016 #62
The Economic Bill of Rights is a good deal more than fair wage and health care dflprincess May 2016 #195
We agree on the Economic Bill of Rights, not on Sanders Albertoo May 2016 #197
It's become a pay to play system. Take the money or die. ErikJ May 2016 #22
Double, make that a triple REC for Chomsky! Fuddnik May 2016 #24
I disagree with Chomsky. tomg May 2016 #25
Noam is correct, of course. The Sanders Campaign is the last, best hope to save FDR's Party... NewImproved Deal May 2016 #26
Post removed Post removed May 2016 #44
+1,000,000 TIME TO PANIC May 2016 #61
Ha! Grazie... NewImproved Deal May 2016 #153
Brilliant national treasure. nt zentrum May 2016 #28
K&R n/t Joe Shlabotnik May 2016 #31
Anything that stops people from voting for liberal Democrats only helps RW Republicans. baldguy May 2016 #34
If Hillary is the nominee, which liberal democrat should I vote for? Arugula Latte May 2016 #37
Academics study, understand, and explain. They aren't there to lead cheers for "the party.' Ed Suspicious May 2016 #39
What a mouth full of marbles. Phlem May 2016 #110
We legalized gay marriage, marijuana, passed most of a proper health care plan... joshcryer May 2016 #36
Except it was SCrOTUS that legalized gay marriage, truebrit71 May 2016 #50
The dozens of gay marriage challenges were spearheaded by democrats. joshcryer May 2016 #72
The Two Parties gordyfl May 2016 #53
Nader was sure wrong about that. Thank Ralph for Bush/Cheney redstateblues May 2016 #58
Also Thank gordyfl May 2016 #82
Someone HadTo State The Disgusting Truth billhicks76 May 2016 #54
Unfortunately there are many Trump enablers on DU. Sad redstateblues May 2016 #60
You realize "sad" is Trump's favorite tweet-word? hueymahl May 2016 #97
This and other sources would say otherwise. LiberalFighter May 2016 #65
If you disagree with Chomsky, just listen to the President. TIME TO PANIC May 2016 #66
Harry Enten" Hillary Clinton Was Liberal. Hillary Clinton Is Liberal (FiveThirtyEight) LiberalFighter May 2016 #67
Hillary and Bernie are both Liberal LiberalFighter May 2016 #69
Nope elljay May 2016 #163
I really don't give a flip what Chomsky thinks Gman May 2016 #73
Back In the 1800s and Early 1900s, Wasn't Democratic Party Very Racist? TomCADem May 2016 #74
k&r silvershadow May 2016 #75
Chomsky! stopbush May 2016 #77
K & R N/T w0nderer May 2016 #83
Legislators like to pretend we live in a center-right country. That's just not true ... Scuba May 2016 #84
Is Chomsky even registered to vote? BlueMTexpat May 2016 #85
Whether or not he's registered to vote has no bearing on whether his statement is true. But then, Gene Debs May 2016 #124
The republican party of today has moved into the insane asylum, so any thing else Loki May 2016 #91
That's kinda what he's saying, though... UtahJosh May 2016 #94
I'm a Democrat and I don't do labels. Loki May 2016 #95
"I'm a Democrat" and "I don't do labels" hueymahl May 2016 #98
So "Democrat" is a label. Loki May 2016 #102
And yet you label Noam Chomsky a "purist". UtahJosh May 2016 #103
I don't do purity tests either hueymahl May 2016 #116
Can somebody link to this wonderful pre-DLC pre-Clinton platform the DINOS ruined? whatthehey May 2016 #92
K&R.. disillusioned73 May 2016 #96
Overly harsh runaway hero May 2016 #101
Maybe that is my problem c-ville rook May 2016 #120
If you want to address the problem of a "lack of excitement for her," there'll have to be Gene Debs May 2016 #146
In the sense that more republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act in 1964 than Democrats, pampango May 2016 #112
What I've been saying and saying and saying. Everytime I do... Triana May 2016 #115
This message was self-deleted by its author NRaleighLiberal May 2016 #190
Kicked and recommended! nt Enthusiast May 2016 #118
Wow colsohlibgal May 2016 #121
Our country has become a feudal state...We, the Peasants and libdem4life May 2016 #123
Can we ever get through a Chomsky post w/o the words corporatist or neoliberal??? Gomez163 May 2016 #125
Just picture Hillary and you have the definition... Human101948 May 2016 #133
brilliant. Gomez163 May 2016 #135
Thanks! Human101948 May 2016 #138
compared to where conservatives are...I'll take moderate republicans....they are the ones who beachbum bob May 2016 #128
Yes, lets settle for less! KPN May 2016 #137
Tell me something I don't know (oh wait some people don't get it) PatrynXX May 2016 #131
Chomsky is focusing on economics, and he means a moderate GOPer from 1972 andym May 2016 #132
Obama: "back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican" arcane1 May 2016 #134
lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_%28TV_network%29 stonecutter357 May 2016 #140
At what point in time were elected Democrats much further left than they are now? n/t hughee99 May 2016 #142
Love Noam libodem May 2016 #144
K&R - Been saying it for years Ferd Berfel May 2016 #150
Chomsky is right on this issue d_legendary1 May 2016 #161
Hillary is not a moderatte. Shae is more to the right than many Republicans INdemo May 2016 #165
Which is why policy SUCKS harun May 2016 #173
We need Chomsky to bring back that old anarcho syndicalist party Progressive dog May 2016 #175
Since he is libertarian leaning himself then he is not a Democrat. Thinkingabout May 2016 #176
Definitely. nt valerief May 2016 #179
Reality Beowulf42 May 2016 #181
Chomsky must read DU felix_numinous May 2016 #182
I understand the corporate influence issue, however, ... HuckleB May 2016 #184
I agree with Chomsky. Which leads me to ask the GOP trolls here wtf they're problem with Hillary is? tenderfoot May 2016 #189
DU member since 2002 WITH the same profile name. nolabels May 2016 #196
 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
180. The arrogance of those that side with the billionaires.
Mon May 16, 2016, 05:28 PM
May 2016

I wonder what the criteria for "Flagged For Review" is? This poster has 7 hides in the last two months. Demeter was FFR with no posts hidden that I can tell.

KPN

(15,587 posts)
129. Then the D Party will go the way of the Rs, i.e., we will take it over and then
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:08 AM
May 2016

you'll be budged.

 

imagine2015

(2,054 posts)
15. Who won?
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:39 PM
May 2016

The trust busters? And that would be Secretary Hillary, that great enemy and militant fighter against big business and Wall Street banksters.

She's a popular populist!

Sure she is.
 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
117. It was, until Hillary became the front-runner, more or less.
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:10 AM
May 2016

To be fair, I think it has to be REALLY explicit to cross the line, but I wouldn't cry if she were PPR'ed. Don't want to see that shit here.

Else You Are Mad

(3,040 posts)
151. Last I checked...
Mon May 16, 2016, 12:53 PM
May 2016

This is Democratic Underground and not Moderate Republican Underground, so what 'we' are you talking about?

frylock

(34,825 posts)
167. Yes, moderate Republicans have won.
Mon May 16, 2016, 02:03 PM
May 2016

Congratulations. The Party is now yours. Do with it what you will.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
178. Don't spend those "winnings," they may be confiscated and your candidate may be shown the door.
Mon May 16, 2016, 05:15 PM
May 2016

That is likely to throw a wrench into the long-laid plans of the Radical Center Blue Dogs, DLC, Third Wayers and Clintonites to take over and colonize the Democratic Party.

 

Bangbangdem

(140 posts)
188. Hahaha!
Mon May 16, 2016, 07:59 PM
May 2016

I'm sure you've published as many times as him. And you hold a teaching position at MIT. And I'm sure that you are the foremost linguist in the world. Cmon. You are going n to marginalize him by some off-handed comment?

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
18. Glad to see that at least one person acknowledges
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:54 PM
May 2016

the coup d'etat of the Democratic Party. So it HAS been overthrown by moderate Republicans.
I thought so.
The revolution has started, and it will not be over until the RepubliCONs who joined the Democratic Party go back to their own party, and knock some sense into it.

 

floriduck

(2,262 posts)
119. And the consequences of that will likely be a choice between
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:19 AM
May 2016

a clueless, racist loose canon and a calculating, lying crooked canon.

brooklynite

(93,879 posts)
149. WHEN doesn't matter....
Mon May 16, 2016, 12:44 PM
May 2016

...the DNC members were elected by State Party members who were elected by County Party members who were elected by Democrats.

...the elected officials were elected by voters.

If this bothers you, run some candidates against them (who can win).

brooklynite

(93,879 posts)
159. Not going so well, hmm?
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:33 PM
May 2016

And Bernie's THREE endorsed candidates (assuming they all win their Primaries) aren't likely to shake up the House as much as you want.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
164. I think Bernie is doing swimmingly.
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:49 PM
May 2016

It's not over till it's over, brooklynite. And I promise you it will be all over for us all in about 10 weeks, somewhere around July 25-28th, 2016.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
192. Just because they have been selected in an election
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:07 PM
May 2016

does not mean that there is a coup d'etat. It can be carried on by lying to the constituents to get their votes, then doing what their corporate masters command them to do.
Don't be a fool, and think that just because they have been elected that they are going to do any good for the people.
Billy Ray Joe Bob Clinton repealed Glass-Steagel, and enacted NAFTA, for example.
Now Hilliary wants to make him in charge of recovering the economy, because "he knows how to do that."
You should know that he knows how to do what is good for the corporations, and not the people.

brooklynite

(93,879 posts)
193. "It can be carried on by lying to the constituents..."
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:11 PM
May 2016

In other words, voters just aren't as smart as you are. YOU were able to figure it out, but they're too deluded?

"Vote SANDERS: Unless you're too stupid!"

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
194. No, I am not saying that I am smarter
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:21 PM
May 2016

All I am saying is to look at past practice. It is a harbinger of future behavior. It always has been, and always shall be.
Ignore it at your peril.
There are plenty of folks who understand this. There are also many who do not.
I am just trying to raise awareness of this fact.

 

Feeling the Bern

(3,839 posts)
71. Time for loyal center/right Democrats that own the party to throw Chomsky under the bus
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:41 PM
May 2016

Dissent is disloyalty.

brooklynite

(93,879 posts)
177. I was planning to just ignore him, as I always do.
Mon May 16, 2016, 05:12 PM
May 2016

Intellectuals who pontificate from outside the system aren't worth my time. He's welcome to join the Party leadership (if he's even deigned to register as a Democrat) and advocate for changes; that's what I try to do.

 

Feeling the Bern

(3,839 posts)
186. Yep. . .party over principle. Join the Party then you can criticize it
Mon May 16, 2016, 07:34 PM
May 2016

Remind me to switch to independent after this election cycle. The Democrats have become something I just can't fathom anymore.

Any other liberal intellectuals we need to throw under the bus?

 

fasttense

(17,301 posts)
87. In our winner take all Democracy, a third party doesn't have a chance
Mon May 16, 2016, 07:42 AM
May 2016

But transforming a once liberal party back to being real liberals and NOT petend RepubliCONS is possible.

What exactly have the Democrats won by being pretend Conservatives? A chnce to be like RepubliCONS? Seems to me they lost too, they just don't know it.

All in it together

(275 posts)
104. The So called Democrats won the right to rule over the Democratic Party
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:24 AM
May 2016

And control our government, and get wealthy and hang with the .01%. And keep protecting the .01%'s interests, the multinational corporations and military industrial complex has succeeded wildly due to the Democons (moderate, New Dems, Blue Dogs, 3rd way etc.)

We the people lost real representation in our democracy. Go Bernie and keep going whethe you win this election or not.

arikara

(5,562 posts)
156. ... or the moderate republicans can move back to the republican party
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:28 PM
May 2016

and take it back from the teabaggers instead of inflicting themselves on the Democratic party.

 

ericson00

(2,707 posts)
5. given this kind of tripe, Noam Trotsky's place on this board
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:14 PM
May 2016

should be one of scorn. After all, he is attacking our party.

 

imagine2015

(2,054 posts)
12. "Our party"? Do you have as much influence and control as big business and Wall Street in the party
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:37 PM
May 2016

Or do you think the working class majority holds the real power in the Democratic Party?

Just wondering.

zeemike

(18,998 posts)
20. I think the "Our Party" refers to the elite few who own it.
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:56 PM
May 2016

Not the many who are supposed to vote blindly for the "Party"

 

Redwoods Red

(137 posts)
19. Your red-baiting is so last century. And off base, besides.
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:54 PM
May 2016

I think Chomsky's got a little more stature that some shit-slinging anonymous internet warrior.

 

sylvanus

(122 posts)
43. "Noam Trotsky"?
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:49 PM
May 2016

Really? this is the shit we've sunk to on DU. Bagging on Noam Chompsky, a voice for honesty and truth, in the bullshit wilderness. WE ARE DONE!

 

AntiBank

(1,339 posts)
56. give me a break. If a corporatist faction of the Democratic Party
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:10 PM
May 2016

is dragging it ever rightward for decades as it now has, then people like Chomsky should be praised for pointing this out. There are sooo many who have shunted aside defence of progressive positions and in turn rip into people who take quarrel with neoliberalism all because of their backing a tragically flawed yet corporately- anointed candidate.

A person who puts party unity and toeing the line in support of oligarchy-benefiting ideas BEFORE reasoned defence and promotion of progressive ideas is a threat to the continuation of ANY major progressive political force being left in the USA.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
107. He's attacking Republicans who call themselves Democrats.
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:52 AM
May 2016

Who whored themselves out for money and power and have killed the Democratic Party that used to represent working people.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
127. Obama himself said his policies are that of 1980's republicans.
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:04 AM
May 2016

You can start by scorning him.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
185. Wake up and smell the divided "our party". The leadership of "our party" has been
Mon May 16, 2016, 07:31 PM
May 2016

coopted by the Oligarchy that supports the Conservative (Clinton) Wing of "our Party". We need to attack those in our party that have sold out to the billionaires and no longer hold to Democratic Principles.

nolabels

(13,133 posts)
38. A lot of people have been trying to tell and say that or have even many times already said it
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:45 PM
May 2016

To me Chomsky and Captain Obvious are interchangeable as of late

Being mostly a loner, i try to grasp mostly just the bigger points, that way i know when to get out of the path of the herd when it is at stampede levels

onecaliberal

(32,489 posts)
70. I've said it many times here as well and yes it's obvious but no one in the media or
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:38 PM
May 2016

With influence has said it.

nolabels

(13,133 posts)
76. Sort of like when a lot of the younger people told the party we want more than one choice
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:47 PM
May 2016

Then the party apparatchiks said "No, you take what we give you or you don't get anything" Cont.............

 

lastone

(588 posts)
14. He's 100% right
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:38 PM
May 2016

And those that do not see and understand this are either willfully ignorant or too stupid to process historical logic. Additionally the candidate bringing unprecedented excitement to the democratic party has been marginalized even though he was a 9-1 underdog when the campaign began and it's now basically even - plus the more people hear the more they like of Sanders policies, it's only because Hillary is a brand and most people choose the brand because they don't want to learn about much besides feeding themselves and their families. Given more time Sanders wins this primary and still polls way over trump vs Hillar in a general. Lastly hrc supporters that belittle this movement do so more and more at their and hrc's peril than ever before.

SusanCalvin

(6,592 posts)
29. I wish I felt I could afford that.
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:25 PM
May 2016

I loathe her and the party apparatus she rode in on, but I will hold my nose if absolutely necessary.

chervilant

(8,267 posts)
68. Yeah, well, I live in a very Republican state.
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:36 PM
May 2016

Still, I refuse to compromise. If all goes well, the point will be moot.

#NotMeUs

#DropOutHillary

SammyWinstonJack

(44,129 posts)
86. First time I'm actually glad to reside in a red state. ...I don't have to vote for the flip side of
Mon May 16, 2016, 07:24 AM
May 2016

the same coin this time.

cprise

(8,445 posts)
78. Real moderate Repubs would balk at the "Global Cop" wars, however.
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:53 PM
May 2016

Most Democrats today prefer to go along with the war mongering. Looking at Obama's record, he went for "intervention" in Syria and Libya but backed away from conflict with Iraq and Iran.

OTOH, Clinton enthusiastically supported all of the above.

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
191. Good point
Mon May 16, 2016, 08:12 PM
May 2016

Her influences and friends include Kagan, Kissinger, Petraeus, and Gates. Of those, only Gates really fits in the moderate Republican camp (though he was a big part of both Bush admins before Obama kept him), the rest are real neocons.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
16. Chomsky is just sore the majority of Democrats are reformists, not ideologues
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:42 PM
May 2016

Afak, mainstream Democrats want fair wages and health care for all, and to reduce the income inequality which has become excessive at least since the 90's.



But what Chomsky really believes in is different. He doesn't want to fix fix the system, he dislikes capitalism. And that's probably not what most Democrats believe in.

zeemike

(18,998 posts)
23. And according to your chart
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:03 PM
May 2016

Modern day Democrats don't want to fix it either...those lines have went nothing but up.

Mbrow

(1,090 posts)
32. +1 and it is ironic that
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:29 PM
May 2016

most polling has shown the DNC has moved right of the base for decades.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
41. you seem to forget Obama came to power under the great Recession of 2007-8
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:49 PM
May 2016

Try rising taxes in that environment.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
143. That effin attitude is called Obama's common sense
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:59 AM
May 2016

1929 = disaster until FDR. 2008 = disaster until the Obama engineered recovery

 

FighttheFuture

(1,313 posts)
172. A pretty shitty "recovery"!!
Mon May 16, 2016, 02:12 PM
May 2016

Although I cannot totally Blame Obama. He did want to do more and was stymied by the R House.

Regardless, Obama is very DLC type Demcrat so what he can really do, ala FDR, is not going to happen. So we just stumble along while our country is being bought up for pennies on the dollar. For example, Real estate crises and the opportunities for monied interests to turn us into a nation of renters with no hopes of home ownership. He is also carrying the Oligarchs water to sell us out with deals like the TPP and TPIP. In the end, just another handler sending us down the shit-chute of Fascism and Corporatism.

Pretty pathetic, overall.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
187. Obama did a pretty good job
Mon May 16, 2016, 07:58 PM
May 2016

As I already mentioned, he engineered the recovery after a 'Great Recession', maintaining the US at the top of the competitiveness rankings while introducing the Affordable Care Act.

On a rank of 1 best to 44 last, I'm fairly certain Obama will end up ranking around 10-15 in the list of US Presidents.

dflprincess

(28,057 posts)
30. Today's mainstream Democrats have no interest in fair wages, health care for all or
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:26 PM
May 2016

reducing income inequality.

Before Bernie came along, damn few of them ever mentioned any of those issues. A few more may be paying lip service but most of them have Clinton's "no we can't" attitude than any commitment to making it happen.

dflprincess

(28,057 posts)
40. Believe me, it doesn't make me happy to say it
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:49 PM
May 2016

I've been active in the DFL since 1972, but if Bernie hadn't run this year I don't think I would even have bothered to caucus.

I just hope that the people he brought in to the process this year stick with it because the only way we will take back the Democratic party is if we wrench it away from the Third Way types starting at the local level and working our way up - and it may take several election cycles, but it can be done.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
147. You're damn right it can be done.
Mon May 16, 2016, 12:39 PM
May 2016

... and this election itself may just be the beginning of the end of the Corporate wing of the Democratic Party. If not this election cycle, then almost assuredly the next.
Real Democrats are going to get this job done eventually. Go Bernie!

dflprincess

(28,057 posts)
49. Says a lack of action by mainstream Democrats. They don't even talk about these issues
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:54 PM
May 2016

much less propose any remedies.

 

CrowCityDem

(2,348 posts)
57. So why did they fight for minimum wage increases and the ACA?
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:11 PM
May 2016

If they didn't care, they wouldn't have tried to pass bills to address the issues.

Have you forgotten that we spent nearly two years fighting to get the health care progress we have now? It took two years and the biggest majorities in a generation to do that, so the reticence towards Bernie's plans isn't because Dems are heartless, it's because they know we have so many other things to do that we can't spent the entire next term fighting a fight that we can't win right now.

Fair wages? Dems have been fighting for pay equality. Dems tried to pass minimum wage increases all along. Remember when Bernie was in the fight for $10.10 just a couple years ago? Funny how that wasn't called a conservative cop-out back then.

What mainstream Democrats have no interest in is coddling the delusions of people who think we can wave a magic wand and pass anything that comes to mind.

runaway hero

(835 posts)
100. Does the ACA go far enough.
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:13 AM
May 2016

Even what Hillary tried to do in 1993 was more. How about real change - and not just taking people's money.


Why do you think Trump is winning. People are sick of the same old crap. Give them something new.

 

CrowCityDem

(2,348 posts)
106. The question wasn't whether it 'was enough'...
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:45 AM
May 2016

it was whether Democrats care about these issues. The fact that we spent two years and an ocean of political capital to pass the ACA says that yes, contrary to what you're saying, Democrats sure did.

Asking if something could be better is a completely different issue than asking if people are soulless monsters who don't care at all about the people.

Myself, I don't see any way that something more liberal was going to pass at the time, given the makeup of the Senate. I can't fault them too much for getting what they could. If they held out for more, we wouldn't have gotten anything.

runaway hero

(835 posts)
108. You have to ask for the sky in those types of negotiations.
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:57 AM
May 2016

Obama started in the middle and got dragged center right, imo. Not his fault entirely but I think we could have got more.

runaway hero

(835 posts)
111. I would have pushed harder for the public option.
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:01 AM
May 2016

Lieberman should have had his hands broken, he was coming in weak.

 

Gene Debs

(582 posts)
122. They fought for the ACA because it was a way to make sure the insurance cartels remain in
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:56 AM
May 2016

charge of the health care system while giving the appearance of addressing the problem.

KPN

(15,587 posts)
136. Fight that we can't win?
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:21 AM
May 2016

Now there's a winning attitude for you! Hillary's got no better chance of being successful in today's DC climate than Bernie does.

What you folks don't get is: (1) Bernie is and has always been a pragmatic realist when it comes to legislation. Just look at his record. He's also had far more success at reaching across the aisle and getting GOP support for legislation than Hillary -- that's a fact, look it up. And (2) Bernie isn't about to compromise before negotiations even begins! He understands the power of the bully pulpit and the power of the people and will use them, unlike Obama.

 

CrowCityDem

(2,348 posts)
141. Yes, there are fights we can't win.
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:33 AM
May 2016

If we don't control the House, and if we don't control the supermajority in the Senate, no amount of fighting is going to give us a far-left government. That was the case when the ACA was being negotiated. When there wasn't a single vote to spare, things like the public option had virtually no chance of passing, so why would you waste your limited political capital on that, when you're not going to wind up getting what you want?

Talking as though we can pass anything we want is reckless. It's the same kind of wishful thinking that people attached to Obama in '08, and when reality fell short of that, people became disillusioned.

Admitting we have to pick and choose where to invest our energy, and to take what we can get in areas where the movement isn't on our side, isn't weak. It's good governance.

KPN

(15,587 posts)
199. That's the story line both parties have spinned for several decades now
Tue May 17, 2016, 10:29 AM
May 2016

and it has served them well. Artificial divisions to enable artificial blame to enable status quo, a tight grip on power and self enrichment.

Continue to play that game if you want. We can only accomplish what we believe we can accomplish. Said another way, we CAN accomplish what we believe in and believe we can accomplish.

I'm done being complicit.

Doremus

(7,261 posts)
155. Do you remember the words "Single payer is off the table?"
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:24 PM
May 2016

They were uttered before negotiations even started.

Magic wand? I'd just be happy to have a government that works for people, not the highest bidder. You want to call that wishing for a magic wand we really have little hope left.

 

Matrosov

(1,098 posts)
160. ACA doesn't help anyone but private insurers
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:33 PM
May 2016

If ACA had been a Republican idea - wait a minute, it actually started out as Romneycare - Democrats would dismiss it a corporate cronyism, and rightfully so.

Having the government force you to buy Product X doesn't help anyone but the producer of Product X, aka the private insurers.

Perhaps if we would've expanded Medicare or reigned in the power of private insurers. Weird how no other country spends as much on health care per person as the US, and yet no other country gives AETNA/Humana/United as much power as the US, huh?

 

CrowCityDem

(2,348 posts)
162. Listen to yourself...
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:37 PM
May 2016

It doesn't help anyone? Really? Those millions of people who either got covered through the Medicaid expansion, or were finally able to afford coverage with subsidies, or the people who were no longer denied coverage for being sick, do they not exist?

This is why the arguments here keep devolving. When you take such an absurd position, there's no way to talk logically.

 

Gene Debs

(582 posts)
183. Affording coverage is not the same as affording care, as all too many of these feel-good
Mon May 16, 2016, 06:56 PM
May 2016

stories are ending up. When you have insurance that's so affordable that you can finally afford it, 99 percent of the time the co-pays and, especially, the deductibles are so outrageously and unaffordably high that it renders the insurance unusable and therefore worthless. Obamacare was never anything more than a half-assed acknowledgment that something has to be done, but in such a way as to make sure to leave the insurance cartels running the health care system.

When I tried to get insurance through the ACA, guess what? We couldn't find a plan that i could afford. So much for affordable! So I got to pay a nice fine for being too broke to get with the plan. Luckily I was finally able to get insurance through my union. Obamacare was nothing but a nice sloppy wet kiss on the insurance industry's ass, and simply claiming that it's some kind of godsend doesn't change that.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
63. Show me a system working better than capitalist social-democracy
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:30 PM
May 2016

That system always need fixing, but it beats socialism or state run economies.

chknltl

(10,558 posts)
17. KnR. If MLK, FDR, and Jesus agreed with Chomsky....
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:54 PM
May 2016

....i would not be surprised by an equal amount of negative responses in this thread.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
46. FDR believed in capitalism and Jesus is mostly a myth
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:51 PM
May 2016

So that doesn't get Chomsky's pipe dreams any further

dflprincess

(28,057 posts)
52. FDR did not believe in unrestrained capitalism
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:58 PM
May 2016

and he believed we deserved an Economic Bill of Rights. You never heard the Third Way types who are running the party now mention these things.

http://www.ushistory.org/documents/economic_bill_of_rights.htm

[div class = "excerpt"]
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all — regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
62. The Economic Bill of Rights is pretty much what I initially stated
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:27 PM
May 2016

A fair wage and health care for all.

dflprincess

(28,057 posts)
195. The Economic Bill of Rights is a good deal more than fair wage and health care
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:54 PM
May 2016

(note: health CARE, not health insurance)

and is awfully close to Bernie's platform.

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
197. We agree on the Economic Bill of Rights, not on Sanders
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:08 PM
May 2016

Sanders has an anti-capitalism bent that is quite different from the Economic Bill of Rights.
Sanders expressed sympathy for the Sandinistas who were Marxist loons.
Sanders uses the language of class warfare which is totally unhelpful.

I'd much prefer to mend the existing capitalist system, gut the GW tax breaks and extend health care to all, with some modicum of patient payment to avoid the abuse of the system like in some places in Europe (some doctors prescribing excessive amounts of drugs or days off because it's just the state paying)

 

ErikJ

(6,335 posts)
22. It's become a pay to play system. Take the money or die.
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:03 PM
May 2016

The Dems just less blatantly than the Republicans.

tomg

(2,574 posts)
25. I disagree with Chomsky.
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:16 PM
May 2016

In fact, I think he is being kind by calling them moderate Republicans. But then I remember Eisenhower and later
Lindsay ( who I thought of as moderate Republicans).

 

NewImproved Deal

(534 posts)
26. Noam is correct, of course. The Sanders Campaign is the last, best hope to save FDR's Party...
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:21 PM
May 2016

...from the usurping Yuppies of the Rainbow Oligarchy.

[link:|

Response to NewImproved Deal (Reply #26)

 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
34. Anything that stops people from voting for liberal Democrats only helps RW Republicans.
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:38 PM
May 2016

Chomsky is selling his soul cheap these days.

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
37. If Hillary is the nominee, which liberal democrat should I vote for?
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:43 PM
May 2016

Should I write in Bernie for the general?

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
110. What a mouth full of marbles.
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:59 AM
May 2016

So the political national committees have no skin in the game? The DNC has had nothing to do with the situation? Anyone vocalizing "not in into Hillary" are selling their souls cheap?

So if Hillary loses it's everyone else's fault?

Typical.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
36. We legalized gay marriage, marijuana, passed most of a proper health care plan...
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:41 PM
May 2016

...and almost completely without the Republicans.

 

truebrit71

(20,805 posts)
50. Except it was SCrOTUS that legalized gay marriage,
Sun May 15, 2016, 10:55 PM
May 2016

Mary Jane is still illegal, ask the feds, and the "proper healthcare" is not much more than a gift to insurance companies...

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
72. The dozens of gay marriage challenges were spearheaded by democrats.
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:41 PM
May 2016

The states that legalized marijuana did it with the help of democrats. (In Colorado the democrats led those efforts.)

And the ACA is salvageable with a public option, and it already has waivers for states to do it their own way, and Colorado, leading yet again, is going to push for single payer, led by, who else? Democrats.

gordyfl

(598 posts)
82. Also Thank
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:43 AM
May 2016

Bill Clinton & Monica Lewinski for the Dems losing in 2000.
For many voters, that scandal, along with Bill Cilnton's impeachment gave them reason to go with Bush.

 

billhicks76

(5,082 posts)
54. Someone HadTo State The Disgusting Truth
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:02 PM
May 2016

They have infested the dialogue here too. They like to call liberals Trump supporters.

redstateblues

(10,565 posts)
60. Unfortunately there are many Trump enablers on DU. Sad
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:22 PM
May 2016

This idea that there is some kind of equivalence between HRC and Trump is foolish and dangerous. I see a lot of that on this site

hueymahl

(2,415 posts)
97. You realize "sad" is Trump's favorite tweet-word?
Mon May 16, 2016, 08:51 AM
May 2016

I'm sure you were not meaning to ape his style, but I thought you might want to choose a different rhetorical device in the future.

elljay

(1,178 posts)
163. Nope
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:40 PM
May 2016

You are using charts that make comparisons, without taking into account to what or to whom they are comparing. As our Democratic Party has moved to the right, and the Republican Party has moved to the extreme right, it doesn't take much to be on the "liberal" side. The fact that a Senator voted a certain way as compared to a relatively conservative group of Senators on a series of very selective bills that hit the floor of the Senate doesn't make one a liberal on the broad spectrum of ideas. Sorry, but many of Hillary Clinton's (and Obama's) policies are remarkably similar to those of Richard Nixon and the Republican Party of the 60s. That is not liberal to me and to millions of Democrats and former Democrats who are sickened by our party's drift to the right. Please own up to the fact that she is a moderate, as she has admitted herself, and stop trying to tell those of us who are true progressives that we are don't understand our own beliefs.

TomCADem

(17,378 posts)
74. Back In the 1800s and Early 1900s, Wasn't Democratic Party Very Racist?
Sun May 15, 2016, 11:44 PM
May 2016

I am not even talking about pre-civil war. For example, Woodrow Wilson sounded like a latter day Donald Trump in a 1902 book:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2015/1214/5-surprising-facts-about-Woodrow-Wilson-and-racism

In a 1902 book about American history, Wilson exposed his bigotry on the page in a passage about immigrants. He described “men of the lowest class” from Italy and “of the meaner sort” from Hungary and Poland, as “men out of the ranks where there was neither skill nor energy nor any initiative of quick intelligence; and they came in the numbers ... sordid and hapless elements of their population, the men whose standards of life and work are such as American workmen had never reamed of hitherto.”


Likewise, even Roosevelt signed off on the Japanese American concentration camps. So, while Chomsky might wax poetic about what the Democratic Party used to be, I don't think these Democrats are Republicans type statements make any sense.
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
84. Legislators like to pretend we live in a center-right country. That's just not true ...
Mon May 16, 2016, 06:44 AM
May 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/03/04/one-study-explains-why-its-tough-to-pass-liberal-laws/

Broockman and Skovron find that legislators consistently believe their constituents are more conservative than they actually are. This includes Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives. But conservative legislators generally overestimate the conservatism of their constituents by 20 points. “This difference is so large that nearly half of conservative politicians appear to believe that they represent a district that is more conservative on these issues than is the most conservative district in the entire country,” Broockman and Skovron write. This finding held up across a range of issues.

BlueMTexpat

(15,349 posts)
85. Is Chomsky even registered to vote?
Mon May 16, 2016, 06:59 AM
May 2016

Does he vote at all?

Or does he just issue these proclamations from the Empyrean?

 

Gene Debs

(582 posts)
124. Whether or not he's registered to vote has no bearing on whether his statement is true. But then,
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:00 AM
May 2016

you know that already.

Loki

(3,825 posts)
91. The republican party of today has moved into the insane asylum, so any thing else
Mon May 16, 2016, 08:29 AM
May 2016

whether liberal, progressive or moderate is where thinking, rational people reside. I can deal with that. I'm not a purist Noam. I want reason, not insanity.

UtahJosh

(131 posts)
94. That's kinda what he's saying, though...
Mon May 16, 2016, 08:39 AM
May 2016

He specifically says the republicans are off the spectrum. "In the insane asylum", as you put it. So thus out of contention for "real humans" to side with.

You don't need to be a purist. But you need to decide where you stand. Are you liberal? Progressive? Moderate?

They're all different, you see.

Loki

(3,825 posts)
95. I'm a Democrat and I don't do labels.
Mon May 16, 2016, 08:41 AM
May 2016

Therefore, the purity comment. I've worked with people from across the spectrum of beliefs and occupations. That's the only way we ever get anything done. Building consensus not excluding people. I refuse to be the left's version of the tea party.

hueymahl

(2,415 posts)
98. "I'm a Democrat" and "I don't do labels"
Mon May 16, 2016, 08:55 AM
May 2016

Something is wrong with that statement.

What you mean is, "I do labels when it is convenient for me to do so"

Loki

(3,825 posts)
102. So "Democrat" is a label.
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:16 AM
May 2016

It's my party affiliation, like RN is my profession, like "female" is my gender" What the hell are you talking about. I don't do your "not progressive enough" label your "purity" label and all the other BS that you like to throw around so quantify whether I'm liberal enough.

"

UtahJosh

(131 posts)
103. And yet you label Noam Chomsky a "purist".
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:24 AM
May 2016

Isn't that a label?

Me thinks you don't do labels you don't like, is the thing.

(specifically left wing labels)

hueymahl

(2,415 posts)
116. I don't do purity tests either
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:08 AM
May 2016

I wouldn't pass any but my own.

Did not mean to offend. Just found it funny that you labeled yourself a democrat but thought other labels offensive.

Sometimes I should just keep my observations to myself!

whatthehey

(3,660 posts)
92. Can somebody link to this wonderful pre-DLC pre-Clinton platform the DINOS ruined?
Mon May 16, 2016, 08:30 AM
May 2016

Because I have looked at several from long before either had any influence and I'm just not seeing anything that speaks to universal progressive ideals. Bits of them all were good, but plenty of bits that DU tells me no REAL progressive could suppirt and plenty of loud silences too.

runaway hero

(835 posts)
101. Overly harsh
Mon May 16, 2016, 09:14 AM
May 2016

Hillary has tried. Healthcare 93/94 for one. But instead of complaining on the internet, people need to be more active.


Having said that, there is a lack of excitement for her. We need to address this this.

c-ville rook

(45 posts)
120. Maybe that is my problem
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:40 AM
May 2016

Last edited Mon May 16, 2016, 01:30 PM - Edit history (1)

Hillary had her ass handed to her once, trying to do something very progressive, so now we have this Hillary. The "I don't want to reach for anything too big Hillary". Great you are completely practical, so was the assistant principal at my high school, nice guy but I would not have wanted him as President either.

Am I saying every idea has to be a world on fire thought -- no. But a few would be nice. And people will say, correctly, well she is beginning to roll out some interesting ideas. True -- but it would have been nicer if they would not have seemed to be forced on her by a stronger challenger than she suspected.

Will I pull the "D" lever in November -- have to it's a purple state -- and Trump as a President is terrifying. But will I "Feel the Yearn" for someone else as I do -- yep.

 

Gene Debs

(582 posts)
146. If you want to address the problem of a "lack of excitement for her," there'll have to be
Mon May 16, 2016, 12:36 PM
May 2016

some way of transforming her into a non-awful candidate.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
112. In the sense that more republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act in 1964 than Democrats,
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:04 AM
May 2016

it is true that today's elected Democrats are more like moderate republicans of 50 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#By_party

And the National Environmental Protection Act of 1969 passed unanimously in the Senate and 372-15 in the House. Moderate republicans of that era were a lot like modern elected Democrats.

Of course, some todays' elected Democrats resemble not-so-moderate republicans of the 1920's in their isolationism. And today's elected republicans resemble ... not much of anything I can think of.

 

Triana

(22,666 posts)
115. What I've been saying and saying and saying. Everytime I do...
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:07 AM
May 2016

...I get lambasted. Because Hillary Clinton is one of those 1960s Republicans.

I'm really sorry for the truth. But the question is: WHAT are we going to do about it? Voting for ANOTHER moderate Republican is not going to fix the problem.

Response to Triana (Reply #115)

colsohlibgal

(5,275 posts)
121. Wow
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:53 AM
May 2016

I find some of the comments disturbing to say the least. Red baiting and more.

Democratic Socialism is quite different than communism. In communism the state owns about everything. Not the case with socialism, it just involves a much better sharing of the pie. So red baiting is off base.

When a lower middle class couple pays a higher tax percentage that mega corporations that is a problem....and that is common now.

It looks like the fix is on for Hillary. If she can beat Drumpf we'll see. I hope she will surprise me and others like me.

We need a real progressive tax system, we need to quit spending so much of our money on defense. Back to tax....I think many people hear a top tax rate, say 55%, and think that is for all a wealthy persons income..... it is just the tax rate on money over an obscene amount.

Bernie was up against the entrenched third way machine this year but the hope is that the movement will keep growing after this election and someday soon real fundamental change, a cyclical reigning in of robber barons in this era, will happen.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
123. Our country has become a feudal state...We, the Peasants and
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:59 AM
May 2016

They, the Lords...usually residing in or commuting to the DC Beltway...doing the bidding of their Fat Cats.

We now have two Castes, rather than Parties. The underclass Caste vs. the Privileged Caste.

Oligarchy is another definition that we've devolved into.

 

Gomez163

(2,039 posts)
125. Can we ever get through a Chomsky post w/o the words corporatist or neoliberal???
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:01 AM
May 2016

Do any of you geniuses actually know what those terms actually mean??

 

beachbum bob

(10,437 posts)
128. compared to where conservatives are...I'll take moderate republicans....they are the ones who
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:05 AM
May 2016

support LBJ and the civil rights bills.....a moderate republican is still a 1000x better than any conservative now days

PatrynXX

(5,668 posts)
131. Tell me something I don't know (oh wait some people don't get it)
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:15 AM
May 2016

thunk. Not a big fan of his but state the obvious. Fake Democrats have been losing since 2010 after they wouldn't let a then Liberal Obama do anything for 2 years (2009-2011) although right now I think they've gotten rid of most of the fake dems they can handle and probably give it back to them. Then if they didn't learn their lesson in 6 years. Another clean out

andym

(5,441 posts)
132. Chomsky is focusing on economics, and he means a moderate GOPer from 1972
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:16 AM
May 2016

IN 1972 moderate Republicans were more progressive on economics than most Democrats today. He's right that most Democrats would be to the right of Nixon who increased government regulations (EPA) and imposed wage and price controls (central government economic intervention). That's the problem with the after effects of Reagan that persist to this day. Far too many voters buy into it as well. For example, the anti-tax sentiment is still strong-- think of how beloved Proposition 13 is in California to this day (even on DU). A progressive version of Proposition 13 would only prevent property taxes rising on the homes of the needy and elderly, not everyone.

On the social side, he is dead wrong, Democrats have moved far to the left on equal rights than they were in the 70's, when they couldn't even pass the ERA.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
134. Obama: "back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican"
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:18 AM
May 2016

"The truth of the matter is that my policies are so mainstream that if I had set the same policies that I had back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican." -Obama

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/obama-considered-moderate-republican-1980s/story?id=17973080

stonecutter357

(12,682 posts)
140. lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_%28TV_network%29
Mon May 16, 2016, 11:32 AM
May 2016

RT, originally Russia Today, is a Russian government-funded television network that runs cable and satellite television channels directed to audiences outside of Russia as well as providing Internet content in various languages, including Russian.

Russian government-funded television network
government-funded government-funded government-funded government-funded ......

Ferd Berfel

(3,687 posts)
150. K&R - Been saying it for years
Mon May 16, 2016, 12:46 PM
May 2016

I've been saying since late 90's:
Bill Clinton was the best republican president since Eisenhower.

We can't continue with 2 republican parties (the 'centrists and the insane fascists) and no Party on the Left.

d_legendary1

(2,586 posts)
161. Chomsky is right on this issue
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:34 PM
May 2016

There are a number of Dems who are siding with big business instead of regulating them. DWS is the most prolific example of this. There's a reason why a bunch of them are being primaried by progressives. If the progressives can get victories out of these challenges, then the third way will have less pull when it comes to the decision making process of the DNC.

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
165. Hillary is not a moderatte. Shae is more to the right than many Republicans
Mon May 16, 2016, 01:50 PM
May 2016

With her Corporate anointing she could run as a Republican and win the nomination.
It would have been nice if she had and could have taken DWS with her

" 'radical insurgency that doesn’t care about fact"
Does this statement bring anyone to mind from the Clinton Campaign?
.....David Brock and even Bill

Progressive dog

(6,862 posts)
175. We need Chomsky to bring back that old anarcho syndicalist party
Mon May 16, 2016, 04:59 PM
May 2016

like they used to have in the early Soviet Union.
That said, he claims he'd vote for Hillary over Trump in a swing state, so at least he's a pragmatic anarcho syndicalist.

Beowulf42

(202 posts)
181. Reality
Mon May 16, 2016, 06:30 PM
May 2016

And in so doing both of the right wing factions have left the majority of eligible voters out of the process. Look at the poll results about topics real people are concerned with and it becomes obvious that the majority of citizens are way to the left of their "leaders". We "normal" citizens have been waiting for 40 years for the elected elite to do the things we have been asking for, and it looks like we'll get more status quo this election too. If the Democratic Party actually ran a on platform of modern, Progressive ideas it wouldn't lose an election for 50 years.

HuckleB

(35,773 posts)
184. I understand the corporate influence issue, however, ...
Mon May 16, 2016, 07:04 PM
May 2016

... how are the majority of elected Democrats today different from those of past generations when it comes to corporate influence?

nolabels

(13,133 posts)
196. DU member since 2002 WITH the same profile name.
Mon May 16, 2016, 10:27 PM
May 2016

Republican trolls come and go but openings for an authentic POTUS come rarely.

Course, if you look it at the other way, the republicans have even bigger problems with their positions and candidates than us. So with that in mind, it only makes sense they would like to drag us in the mud with them

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Chomsky: The Majority of ...