• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Presidential Election: Biden v. Trump

I just posted part of it. Progressives using this opportunity to sit down at the table under the common goal of taking down Trump in order to make a case for progressive policies. Changing the political default from right to left. Disrupting the political physics that represent the gospel over the last 40 years.

That’s why I asked for yours. Mine seems to be untenable for you.
 
PhDeac said:
I just posted part of it. Progressives using this opportunity to sit down at the table under the common goal of taking down Trump in order to make a case for progressive policies. Changing the political default from right to left. Disrupting the political physics that represent the gospel over the last 40 years.

That’s why I asked for yours. Mine seems to be untenable for you.
Click to expand...

Because it doesn’t involve actual policies. It’s a pipe dream
 
It takes power to move policies forward. If you think actually having the power to advance progressive policies is a pipe dream...


 
PhDeac said:
It takes power to move policies forward. If you think actually having the power to advance progressive policies is a pipe dream...


Click to expand...

I’ve been a part of a few big progressive policy wins. Can you name a progressive policy?
 
Do you think progressive politics only works as an insurgent movement?
 
PhDeac said:
Do you think progressive politics only works as an insurgent movement?
Click to expand...

No, we did ours the old fashion way. But we didn’t get much Republican support. You’re suggesting Republicans are potentially open to supporting progressive policies? Which ones do you have in mind?
 
I think some republicans are open to progressive policies, given the right framing. A fully refundable child tax credit is one example. Of course you aren’t going to get a majority, or even a significant minority, of elected republicans on board, but I think it’s possible to pursue a platform that is both meaningfully progressive and broadly popular across the electorate, including moderate pubs.
 
tiltdeac said:
I think some republicans are open to progressive policies, given the right framing. A fully refundable child tax credit is one example. Of course you aren’t going to get a majority, or even a significant minority, of elected republicans on board, but I think it’s possible to pursue a platform that is both meaningfully progressive and broadly popular across the electorate, including moderate pubs.
Click to expand...

Thanks, tilt. This is what I was looking for.

I think housing presents a similar possibility, either around expanding the voucher program or investment in building affordable housing as a bigger piece of a national infrastructure bill.
 
With the complexity of what Democrats want to achieve the only way they're ever going to be able to successfully do that is was a governing mandate for a significant period of time..
 
Strickland33 said:
No, we did ours the old fashion way. But we didn’t get much Republican support. You’re suggesting Republicans are potentially open to supporting progressive policies? Which ones do you have in mind?
Click to expand...

You keep getting hung up on policies. Which policy doesn’t matter. If you actually believe you’ve got the right ideas, you can sell those ideas to enough people to make them happen. You’re never going to get the Mitch McConnells of the world. Democrats will never again get majority support from white voters. But progressive politicians can make a case to enough people to make them happen as part of a party in power.

Keep in mind that Republicans regularly pass bills that don’t have majority support because they know how to keep power.

Now I am saying Democrats need to gerrymander the shit out of the country if we win big in November? No. But the focus of the next two years needs to beyond policy and more about sustained success up and down the levels of government.

ChrisL68 said:
With the complexity of what Democrats want to achieve the only way they're ever going to be able to successfully do that is was a governing mandate for a significant period of time..
Click to expand...

Exactly. And maintaining power has to be a focus. For too long Democrats have believed that all they have to do is enact the right policies and people will get on board and keep voting Democrat. It’s the Dem version of “we will be greeted as liberators.”
 
PhDeac said:
You keep getting hung up on policies. Which policy doesn’t matter. If you actually believe you’ve got the right ideas, you can sell those ideas to enough people to make them happen. You’re never going to get the Mitch McConnells of the world. Democrats will never again get majority support from white voters. But progressive politicians can make a case to enough people to make them happen as part of a party in power.

Keep in mind that Republicans regularly pass bills that don’t have majority support because they know how to keep power.

Now I am saying Democrats need to gerrymander the shit out of the country if we win big in November? No. But the focus of the next two years needs to beyond policy and more about sustained success up and down the levels of government.



Exactly. And maintaining power has to be a focus. For too long Democrats have believed that all they have to do is enact the right policies and people will get on board and keep voting Democrat. It’s the Dem version of “we will be greeted as liberators.”
Click to expand...

There’s no actual concrete strategy here or theory of power.
 
DeaconSig said:
You are always welcome to extoll the virtues of the Republican Party, modern conservatism, and President Trump.
Click to expand...

He is, but there are no virtues left in modern conservatism, some say there never were.
 
MHBDemon said:
There’s no actual concrete strategy here or theory of power.
Click to expand...

Yep. It's McConnellism from the left, which honestly will lead to a less malevolent McConnellism characterized by slightly less disdain for protected classes and institutionalized kleptocracy.
 
PhDeac said:
You keep getting hung up on policies. Which policy doesn’t matter. If you actually believe you’ve got the right ideas, you can sell those ideas to enough people to make them happen. You’re never going to get the Mitch McConnells of the world. Democrats will never again get majority support from white voters. But progressive politicians can make a case to enough people to make them happen as part of a party in power.

Keep in mind that Republicans regularly pass bills that don’t have majority support because they know how to keep power.

Now I am saying Democrats need to gerrymander the shit out of the country if we win big in November? No. But the focus of the next two years needs to beyond policy and more about sustained success up and down the levels of government.



Exactly. And maintaining power has to be a focus. For too long Democrats have believed that all they have to do is enact the right policies and people will get on board and keep voting Democrat. It’s the Dem version of “we will be greeted as liberators.”
Click to expand...

Problem is that the educated middle class white people that vote Democrat, and the minorities that vote Democrat, don't share the general needs, and even the most progressive people they elect are rich corrupt pricks like Nancy Pelosi. What you end up with is a big immobile tent of disparate voters, led by plutocrats, that can't agree on anything but shaming Republicans for being racist. If the parties are destined to be defined by race and culture, vs economics, then the Democratic party is doomed by geography. Cities cannot defeat states under out electoral system.
 
And before y'all start defending the likes of Pelosi and Feinstein, look at the wealth that they have accumulated since taking office.

ETA: e.g., Pelosi has accumulated more money in only real estate holdings - $45 million - since assuming office than career earnings that a tenure track professor will accumulate over a career. And before y'all say that it's her husband, keep in mind that his last name is Pelosi too and I'm sure that helps.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
MHB and Strick, what’s your vision for politics? What would things look like if government actually worked?
Click to expand...

Since you won't answer the question with specifics, I would say that Johnson's Great Society, enacted by an executive with a stronger distaste for institutionalized racism, is probably my ideal version of government. I don't expect government to take care of all of the problems, though I do expect it to maintain a basic social safety net and remain open to the organizing efforts of social movements to inspire continuous reform.
 
Strickland33 said:
And before y'all start defending the likes of Pelosi and Feinstein, look at the wealth that they have accumulated since taking office.

ETA: e.g., Pelosi has accumulated more money in only real estate holdings - $45 million - since assuming office than career earnings that a tenure track professor will accumulate over a career. And before y'all say that it's her husband, keep in mind that his last name is Pelosi too and I'm sure that helps.
Click to expand...

A single tenure track faculty? The average professor would have to have to work for approximately 320 years to make $45 million over a their whole career. This is more like the life time earnings of an entire academic department with 12 faculty.
 
I'm honestly not trying to start the same shit. What I read from Ph's post was basically a re-tread of the same "Democrats have to win elections before they can pass policies" argument that Democrats make before every election when they are telegraphing an ideological compromise. Yet Democrats never stay in power under this strategy. Never. The Democratic Party got wiped out during the term of the most worldwide rockstar popular Democratic Presidency, under those same conditions.

So if you want to place all your efforts on winning back the Presidency, based on the current Democratic voting coalition, so be it. It's a proven strategy, just don't pretend like this is some new idea on keeping the Democrats in power, because it's not. These same Democratic voters are all going to fall asleep while the Republicans just whip themselves into a frenzy, and we'll run this same shit back in 8 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top