Democratic Party 2017 and beyond

[cardboardbox]

people who want to put a political label on me before we can talk are usually more interested in the label than what i think.

this is very true.

[baldgriff]

I made that case back on post #35 and it was totally ignored...

What was that?

[baldgriff]

Here's the issue, not just for Democrats but Republicans, as well. 20-30 years ago, people were boxed in very simple packages. White collar, blue collar, college-educated, high school-educated, black, white, union member, non-union member and it was easy to see where people fell politically. Parties had a better idea of how to corral their base.

Today, people don't self-identify in those terms, people have become more complex and don't have identity politics.

Two cases in point, which I think bear this out:

My neighbor is late 40's. He's a plumber by trade. Talking with him 10 years ago, he voted straight Democratic ticket as the union was his biggest concern, and they informed his voting. Today, he is still a hard-core union member, but he is also one of the biggest 2nd Amendment rights people I know. Those two concerns are pretty much diametrically opposed to each other. The Republicans will never be union-friendly. He will never see Democrats as gun friendly.

My sister-in-law (now I have to say to start with, she is bat shit crazy, but leaving that aside) is in her mid 50's. 10 years ago, she was a flag waving conservative, military and low taxes were her mantra. Now, her youngest daughter has come out of the closet, and she is a gay rights, military and low taxes person. Again, she doesn't fit into a box.

In some ways, what is happening today is no different than 16th Century Church. People are waiting for someone to come and nail their theses to the Capital doors. I think Bernie was someone who did that, but he was snuffed out.

It's hard to move a party that is entrenched in decades of held belief. Perhaps there is hope to have some of the "fringe" parties actually make some headway.

You used way to many words... I am guessing it never got fully read.

[cardboardbox]

It always fascinates me that when folks move away from talking about politicians and fervently supporting their side, to actually stating their core beliefs, that those beliefs generally tend to be closer to on another than the fervent attacks and defenses on politicians would suggest.

reminds of what I read yesterday:

Many Americans are also comfortable applying the term “enemy” to describe their political opponents.

Four in 10 Democrats, for instance, say they consider the GOP an enemy to people like them, and 56 percent that they consider Trump an enemy. Across the aisle, 56 percent of Republicans say that the Democratic Party is an enemy to people like them.

Respondents to the poll were somewhat less willing to extend that label to other members of the public who disagreed with their choice of candidates in last year’s election. Although 76 percent of Americans who voted for Hillary Clinton say they consider Trump voters to be at best unfriendly, just 30 percent consider them outright enemies. And while 86 percent of Trump voters see Clinton voters as unfriendly or worse to people like them, a relatively lower 39 percent call them enemies.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-media-enemy-poll_us_58aca942e4b02eb3a9832447?ob87cnloitt96enrk9

[baldgriff]

what other topic am I to clarify to determine my political leanings?

[In the Corn]

You used way to many words... I am guessing it never got fully read.

Oh, to dumb it down (for my sixth grade reading level folks):

It's sad, really sad.

[Sour Masher]

So if Trump is a puppet of the Russians are they re-igniting a nuclear arms race with themselves ? Maybe they are playing 11 dimensional chess.

I believe Russia, and Putin in particular, longs for a time when Russia was front and center on the world stage. The arms race between our two countries made both countries matter more on the international stage.

That said, I'm not suggesting that Putin wants the US to engage in an arms race with them. But I do think he sees strategic benefit in us spending lots of resources on our military that we don't need to spend, that may divert us from spending time and resources on other things that would give us competitive advantages in international markets.

We spend more than the next 7 countries combined, and 34% of the total military spending in the world is spent by us: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...nations-combi/

I look at numbers like that in relation to our population, and I see that as tremendous overkill. I imagine if we devote some of those resources to other areas, we would be better served.

[DMT]

I believe Russia, and Putin in particular longs for a time when Russia was front and center on the world stage. The arms race between our two countries made both countries matter more on the international stage.

That said, I'm not suggesting that Putin wants the US to engage in an arms race with them. But I do think he sees strategic benefit in us spending lots of resources on our military that we don't need to spend, that may divert us from spending time and resources on other things. We spend more than the next 7 countries combined, and 34% of the total military spending in the world is spent by us: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...nations-combi/

I look at numbers like that in relation to our population, and I see that as tremendous overkill. I imagine if we devote some of those resources to other areas, we would be better served.

You hippy go back to your tent!

[The Feral Slasher]

I believe Russia, and Putin in particular, longs for a time when Russia was front and center on the world stage. The arms race between our two countries made both countries matter more on the international stage.

That said, I'm not suggesting that Putin wants the US to engage in an arms race with them. But I do think he sees strategic benefit in us spending lots of resources on our military that we don't need to spend, that may divert us from spending time and resources on other things that would give us competitive advantages in international markets.

We spend more than the next 7 countries combined, and 34% of the total military spending in the world is spent by us: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...nations-combi/

I look at numbers like that in relation to our population, and I see that as tremendous overkill. I imagine if we devote some of those resources to other areas, we would be better served.

Hope my comment didn't come off wrong, I was just joking around...the tinfoil hat was for me, not you. I haven't thought much about what Russia's goals and objectives are, but I certainly agree we spend way more than we should on the military.

[Cobain's Ghost]

Hope my comment didn't come off wrong, I was just joking around...the tinfoil hat was for me, not you. I haven't thought much about what Russia's goals and objectives are, but I certainly agree we spend way more than we should on the military.

i was hoping obama would take on military spending, but he was barely able to make a dent. it doesn't seem like anyone can tame the military beast.

[DMT]

i was hoping obama would take on military spending, but he was barely able to make a dent. it doesn't seem like anyone can tame the military beast.

Yea the MIC interests are so entrenched and any cuts will necessarily eliminate jobs and so local interests will always be in play as well.

[nots]

Yea the MIC interests are so entrenched and any cuts will necessarily eliminate jobs and so local interests will always be in play as well.

Plus, if you advocate for even $1 less spending, you are soft on terriorism and hate the troops. You will primaried by someone in your party or Swift Boated in your Congressional race by the other side

[cardboardbox]

Next issue for me to expound my thoughts on?

what are your views on taxes, both personal and corporate.

[Sour Masher]

Yea the MIC interests are so entrenched and any cuts will necessarily eliminate jobs and so local interests will always be in play as well.

Yeah, this is sadly true at the local level, but I think we could acutally create more jobs than we cut by diverting some of the unbelievable, silly money we spend on things like fighter jets and stealth jets we never even use, to other project. I mean, I'm sure most on here have seen the staggering waste--scores of billions of dollars, on truly absurd equipment that never even gets used. I have to think an awful lot of an $80 billion fluff contract goes into the pockets of the very rich, and not into job creation. And lots of cuts could be made, and diversion of funds made, that would not weaken our capacity to protect ourselves on iota. In fact, so much waste is related to equipment manufacturing for fighting a convension war, when we should be spending more on cyberware, guerilla tactics, untelligence, etc.

Here is one article of some of the top money wasters from the recent spending bill, and it misses quite a few older ones that are even worse that we still waste money on. I mean, you almost HAVE to waste a lot of money when you have a $600 billion annual budget. By comparison, we spend $70 billion at the federal level on education. It's more than we spend on education, veterans, housing, labor, foreign aid, energy and epa, food and agriculture, and Science and NASA combined.

But you and Cobain's Ghosts and Nots are right, this is all pie in the sky thinking. No policitian on either side could change this for the foreseeable future, although Trump seems to very much want to make it worse.

[baldgriff]

what are your views on taxes, both personal and corporate.

Taxes are to some degree a necessary evil. The more money I give the government - the more responsibility I expect them to have. Unfortunately it seems governments tend to overspend on just about everything due to the bureaucratizing red tape caused to make everything "fair and equitable", rather than efficient and cost effective. Also, the more money I am required to give them - the less freedom I have to choose how my money gets spent.

While I understand that taxes pay for government programs, I cant stand our current tax system, it is confusing to many and taken advantage of by those that can afford to play the shell game. I am in more in favor of a "flat tax" rate, and believe that 10% or whatever number is 10% - no matter what economic class you are from (yes I know that will not go over well - but math is math and doesnt care about social class).

Honestly, I dont know much about corporate taxes to speak to them.