The Democrats need to be as radical to the left as the Repubs are radical to the right.

[kentuck]

You cannot compromise with the Devil, you will still burn in hell.

We need a Party that asks for 90% tax rates on the wealthy. Penalties for shipping jobs overseas. No wars of choice, only of necessity. Jobs for every American that wants a job. Those that cannot work should have a minimum guaranteed income. We need to rebuild our roads and bridges and offer a good education for all our children. We should call for Medicare for all. That is the cheapest medical care we have found yet. When the private sector can deliver it cheaper, only then should we consider other options. Save the Social Security system by raising the limit on payroll tax.

Is that really that radical?

[marmar]

1. It's not that radical.....but the Dems will never do it.

We have a center-right party and a crazy party, both of which pledge their loyalty first and foremost to their corporate benefactors, albeit it to different degrees.

[indepat]

24. The main difference is the center-right party typically won't cross the line of

craven depravity whereas the crazy party keeps forever stretching beyond the boundaries of craven depravity. :D :patriot:

[mmonk]

2. Yep. The only way to get to a real middle is to be the other side of

the pendulum.

[Hubert Flottz]

3. Amen Somebody!

"1 2 3 the Devil's after me"...Damn, he must be hard up for something to do.

[brooklynite]

4. Maybe the Democrats should represent their members...

...who are not ALL radical left.

[mmonk]

5. That's all that are represented.

[robcon]

6. Ridiculous proposals, unless you want Dems to be a fringe 10-20% party in Congress.

In elections, we need to represent the people.

The absurd proposals here have almost no support in this country, or even in the Democratic Party.

[RKP5637]

12. The fringe of the republican party is taking over the party and much of the country. n/t

[robcon]

16. Huh??? How is the 'fringe' of the Repuglican Party getting 50%+ of votes.

That's the 'heart' of the Repuglican Party that's running the House, and has a chance of running the Senate next year.

[RKP5637]

18. IMO because the heart of the Repuglican Party in my time has continued to

move further to the right.

[sabrina 1]

26. You're not familiar with the polls apparently.

Overwhelming numbers of people are FOR a national HC system. Against bailing out crooked banks, FOR SS, against anyone in DC touching it.

Against wars, FOR bringing home the troops and spending that money here.

Maybe try not listening to policitians and their operatives, who are so far removed from the people it's a wonder they even remember them at all even at election time. Check out how popular Congress is, both parties if you want to know how the people feel.

The OP is absolutely correct. Too many loud mouth rightwingers in this country and not nearly enough on the left. We need to change that if it isn't too late already considering what they've done to this country.

[robcon]

27. You're not familiar with the 2010 elections apparently.

Repuglicans now control the House, and made gains in the Senate.

Maybe you should follow politics a little more closely.

[hobbit709]

28. Truman's statement was proved right once again in 2010.

[robcon]

31. Oh, I must have missed something. Feingold lost in 2010. Grayson lost in 2010.

They must have been republicans-lite.

[hobbit709]

32. But who were the majority of the Democrats that lost?

Of course being outspend by the kochroaches and their ilk had nothing to do with it.

[robcon]

34. The ones who ran in conservative districts and states.

There was a big negative reaction to Congress in 2010, and that was evidenced by the huge losses we took in the House, especially in conservative districts.

If you think those seats could have been saved in those districts by running fringe/radical Democrats, I've got a bridge to sell ya.

[hobbit709]

35. How do we know?

Have they actually run a REAL Democrat in those areas?

As far as Feingold and Grayson-would YOU trust the machine results in those states. If you do I'll sell you a bridge and I'll throw in a couple of monuments.

[robcon]

37. Wow... you've got an "excuse" for everything.

All the polls leading up to Feingold's and Grayson's losses showed that they would lose. And they did.

If by REAL Democrats, you mean running someone along the lines of Feingold or Grayson in conservative districts, the results would have been even more catastrophic than they were in November 2010.

The fact that you don't know that going left when the electorate was going right is a prescription for disaster goes back to my earlier post: you don't really pay much attention to politics, do you?

[hobbit709]

38. And you spout the official party line for everything.

I'd rather go down in flames than go along to get along.

[kentuck]

36. How did the lady win in NY 26?

She ran on a really liberal agenda: gay rights, preserving Medicare, raising taxes on the wealthy. And this was considered one of the most conservative districts in America. How do you explain that??

[sendero]

29. Exactly.

... the echo chamber media wants you to believe that the country has moved to the right, it's bullshit.

We lost in 2010 because of Obama and for no other reason.

[paulk]

30. at one time, Ronald Reagan's brand of conservatism

was considered "fringe". The Democratic Party's milqtoast response to the ever increasing militantism of the far right has moved the country to a point where even Reagan is to the left of today's conservatists. I think the OP makes a decent point - the only way we're going to move this country back toward the direction we want is if the Democratic Party actually stands up for it's own principles. Today's Democratic Party is basically the Republican Party of 30 years ago. That is unacceptable to me - not just as a liberal Democrat, but as someone who believes that it is liberal policies and not the center right crap currently coming out of our Democratic caucus that is going to get us out of the mess the conservatives have handed us...

[sufrommich]

7. The Democrats are never going to be more "radical" than

voters allow them to be. There's no point in being radical if you can't get elected.

[Fumesucker]

8. Oh please..

We can easily and completely counter radical right wing activism with moderate right wing policy.

[ileus]

9. why not 95%?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RKP5637]

11. In short, we need a party with some guts to stand up and not wilt into the background

when controversy appears. And then run along and move to the right like frightened little children. Frankly, the democratic party of today is disgusting. What you say isn't radical at all, much of it is what democrats used to be until they decided they were republican-lite.

[Odin2005]

13. K&R!

[RKP5637]

14. The democrats of today play right into the republican game plan. n/t

[KharmaTrain]

15. Its Who Writes The Checks...

Right now every congresscritter and 1/3 or the Senate as well as this President are looking at raising massive amounts of cash for next year. And who do you think writes those $2300 checks and antes up even more for fundraisers? Next year one billion dollars will be squanderedspent on teevee ads and campaign offices and consultants and pollsters. Who do you think is gonna get their calls answered at this point?

The only time the "people" matter are in those short weeks before an election...AFTER the money is collected. And then you'll hear all the platitudes, promises and "hope" speeches that the candidates hope in the heat of an election campaign is all you think or hear. Then once the election is over its back into fundraising mode.

Until our public offices are no longer sold to the highest bidder and our elections as a cottage industry and gravy train for so many things will continue to favor those with the fat wallets.

[RKP5637]

17. Definitely the election goes to the highest bidder. Nice way to run a country into

the ground.

[Larry Ogg]

19. We need to abolish the Capitalist Party

I totally agree with you kentuck, and someone needs to tell it to the Capitalist who hand pick the politicians that most of us get to vote for in our pretend democracy, however, I don’t think they care about what the majority wants.

Realistically, they are not spending trillions of dollars’ on political campaigns to be fare to the working class.

And let’s not forget, that, all that money Capitalist spend on venal politicians who call themselves republicans and democrats just to get elected, comes back 1000 fold. As campaign donations are spent buying airtime on the mainstream media (M$M) owned by the capitalist. This airtime allows their, both stupid and venal puppets too become political celebrities who will, once elected, pass favorable legislation for the Capitalist.

And as for the honest person wanting to get elected, there will be no Capitalist money, no airtime on the Capitalist M$M, no status of political celebrity, no winning elections, and no favorable legislation for the working class.

It’s a strange thing, that, if the ruling elite predator class were to start their own Capitalist political party, an overwhelming majority of people would not vote for them. This means, we now have a paradox, they had to take over the two parties that people would vote for no matter what, and thus create a government of one party rule, while maintaining the illusion of two. Therefore, when comes to major issues, there is no real difference between the two parties we vote for; preserving the status-quo is priority number one, and dividing the American people with a bunch of pathological lies is priory number two.

[RKP5637]

21. Yep, well said! A = B = Capitalist Party. n/t

[CrossChris]

20. Yeah, and the Washington Generals need to practice harder and be as flashy as the Globetrotters

Maybe then, they'd win some games!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. Be realistic. The Democrats have to becom even more (if possible) like the Republicans to win(?).

Being concerned about things like the environment, more lost wars, lack of medical care, education, infrastructure, and common decency, is sooooo impractical and a losing strategy. For a winning strategy we must embrace Republican ideals and call them our own. We must avoid anything that smacks of even milquetoast liberalism lest Rush Limbaugh be upset with us.

[kctim]

23. In order for that to happen

you must convince 80+% of Democrats to vote for those types of radicals.
How do you propose to do that?

[some guy]

25. No.

( to answer the only question in your post. )


kicked & rec'd

[PragmaticLiberal]

33. I don't consider your proposals all that radical....

other than the 90% tax rate on the wealthy.

I know DU has a hatred of wealthy folk but 90% is going overboard...imo.