Forum Thread

Democratic Speaking Out.


Reply to ThreadDisplaying 31 - 45 of 47 Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:
    Dockadams Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:
    jaredsxtn Wrote:

    Chet - Am I the only one who finds it rather ironic how you chide me for criticizing you for appearing to believe that a President can waive a magic wand and get everything they want and then immediately go into criticizing me for having opinions I have never once advocated?

    Please point me to one thread in the nearly six years I've been on this website where I have said that social welfare programs need to be 100% (or ANY percent) paid for. I'm happy to teach you how to post a link to any thread you find that shows me saying anything remotely close to what you accused me of. I wish you the best of luck in your search...

    You seem to have completely forgotten that I'm a damn social worker, Chet. I actually walk the walk when it comes to helping people. However, it's quite frustrating when people like yourself have become convinced that it's simple to fix all of our stubbornly complex problems in our society and that if we only had Bernie Sanders as our dear leader then all of our problems will magically drift away.

    I don't have a myopic, dystopian view of the world; my views are based off a solid understanding of how our government functions based off the Constitution we have and not the government or Constitution we wished we had.

    I know it's impossible for you to believe this, but I actually agree with a majority of things Bernie stands for. Where he loses me is his demagoguery promising his gullible supporters that all of his promises will be paid for by simply taxing millionaires and billionaires.

    Jared, All you do is exaggerate and use innuendo to defend your status quo incrementalism ideology. For example here is a total lie you made up: "all of his promises will be paid for by simply taxing millionaires and billionaires". Total lie.

    Dockadams, You present the perfect support for social change with your reality of. $5 coupon for a $3000 item then you follow up with total support that gave you the worthless coupon. Then of course jaredsxtn would put you in the win column because you have now have a worthless coupon that you didn't have before. So you guys support a status quo that lets people suffer and die and attack the first person in almost 80 years that wants to make a change that would benefit both of you and 300,000,000 million other people. What's your point ???

    Don't forget now, republicans hold the majority in congress, and we have a republican president. Democrats and independents who caucus with them are the minority right now, and for the future. We also have in place a right wing SCOTUS. We're stuck between a rock and a hard place. You know, this is the second occasion when republicans cut taxes in recent years, Bush 43 cut taxes, and Trump cut taxes, and both called it job creation. Among Wall Street and it's investors, they love it, does a tax cut mean those investors will create jobs? Maybe a few. Most wealthy will horde those dollars they get in tax cuts. American voters love tax cuts too, but if you're poor people like me and my wife, who take in less than $30,000 a year, we don't pay any taxes except for Obamacare, and my wife's Obamacare is like having a $5.00 coupon for a $3000.00 item, it sucks because she and I still cannot afford good quality medical care for her. Since we don't pay taxes, and are not living the life of Reilly, we get by, and we're not eating steaks and lobster, do not own a new car, and are living a frugal lifestyle. Oh, there's jobs out here in my state, but almost all pay under $10.00 an hour. Not much for working your ass off. Not enough to buy a home or a new car either.

    So, for democrats to run on a platform per se of jobs, jobs, jobs and to say they're going to enforce or create regulations to thwart Trumpism is a farce. Socialists like Sanders don't stand a chance in getting elected, even if they did, passage of bills to make the poor acquire better paying jobs, single payer HC, and other free social programs won't happen, and you know it as much as Jared and I do. You're talking trickle up economics where taxes will pay for everything that's free. That might work if the tables weren't slanted toward the very wealthy and elites. We have what's called wealth inequality in the USA. Don't expect the wealthy to sit still for that. They'll fight programs like that tooth and nail, and to their last dollar.

    Reread my post above, if I attacked someone of 80 years, point it out. Reread my post above, point out where I support the status quo. Next time I respond to your post, I'll make sure it's only 2 or 3 lines so you'll be able to comprehend my meaning or message more concisely, and it will have a point instead of a drivel. Have a nice day.

    "Reread my post above, if I attacked someone of 80 years, point it out"

    I said you attacked the first person in 80 years to come out with radical changes to help poor people.

    "point out where I support the status quo." You parrot the same criticisms that the status quo present attacking Bernie.

    You present the perfect case for radical change being needed and then you go on to say how nothing to help in a positive way is possible . Of course it is impossible if there is no support for the ideas that would change it.

    The situation got as bad as it did because there was no support for ideas and people that would change it.

    Oh contraire Chet, I didn't attack anyone in this discussion. Let alone someone of 80 years.

    Now I'm a parrot?

    Change is possible, but we must be in the correct political environment/climate (more democrats and progressives) of a majority. I'm saying since democrats are the minority party (president and US congress) we won't be able to accomplish much of anything. I never mentioned Sanders in this thread. I didn't need to.

    I think the best thing for me to do, is to use the ignore feature of this website (blocks user replies), since my comments posted seem to inflame people.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Bernie still has the best way out of the expanding poverty and wage stagnation/falling mess. Energizing the economy would increase the tax revenue eliminating increasing taxes to pay for programs.

    You accused me of lying. I easily proved otherwise. You then changed the discussion.

    If you can't back up your baseless accusations with facts then don't level them in the first place.

    You did not prove anything. You said ""all of his promises will be paid for by simply taxing millionaires and billionaires".

    The link you provided was about college tuition. Not "all". Your gross exaggeration is "Mostly false". But if you believe in a lot of his issues why not support him or people of that ilk. You use things you don't like to totally discredit the overall concept.

    But I personally don't favor imposition as a method to achieve change. I support creating prosperity and then use the extra income to service change. I would counter higher taxes on speculative 3rd party trades with credits on job producing investing . I have a problem with forcing actions instead of rewarding actions. Positive economics.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    You did not prove anything. You said ""all of his promises will be paid for by simply taxing millionaires and billionaires".

    The link you provided was about college tuition. Not "all". Your gross exaggeration is "Mostly false". But if you believe in a lot of his issues why not support him or people of that ilk. You use things you don't like to totally discredit the overall concept.

    That's because his "free" college plan is the only one he's come up with an actual funding plan for. And that plan falls woefully short of actually funding post-secondary education for the millions of Americans graduating high school every year, as PolitiFact showed.

    All of his other fanciful promises are long on the "free stuff" part and stubbornly short on details of how "free" that "stuff" will actually be for the average American.

    Case in point is Bernie's "Medicare for All" proposal. As Vox pointed out after Bernie unveiled it, the proposal "does not do any work explaining how to pay for such a generous benefit package."

    I can go on and on, Chet. Bernie's heart is in the right place, but he's a snake oil salesman because he's convinced his gullible supporters that he alone will fix all of their problems.

    Sound familiar to anyone else you see in the news every day?

    Chet Ruminski Wrote: But I personally don't favor imposition as a method to achieve change. I support creating prosperity and then use the extra income to service change. I would counter higher taxes on speculative 3rd party trades with credits on job producing investing . I have a problem with forcing actions instead of rewarding actions. Positive economics.

    Great. Convince 218 Representatives, 60 Senators, a President to sign it into law, and the courts to uphold it and you're all set.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "does not do any work explaining how to pay for such a generous benefit package."

    You contradict yourself presenting evidence that does not support your assertion that "all" Bernie's programs are to be paid for by taxing the rich.

    Move on and forward and suggest and support what will get Democrats elected.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Move on and forward and suggest and support what will get Democrats elected.

    Ending the far-left purity test. What works in Portland doesn't necessarily work in Birmingham.

    Actually voting instead of watching Dancing With the Stars. Vote in local elections. Vote in state elections. And vote in Federal elections. If someone doesn't vote then they have zero right to complain about a damn thing. Forty percent of eligible voters don't vote in Presidential elections and that percent gets exponentially bigger for local, state, and midterm elections. If we want better representation then we have to get off our lazy asses and vote.

    Recognizing that voting for a 3rd Party candidate in Federal elections is literally throwing your vote away. (Thanks, Jill Stein voters. You really showed us moderate democrats who's boss, huh?!)

    Understanding that politicians are human beings; not Gods to be worshiped.

    Brushing up on civics. The total collapse of understanding how our Constitution functions is a great threat to our country and gives us Neanderthals like Donald.

    Accepting that if your preferred candidate doesn't win their primary the person who beat them would be thousands of times better than a far right-wing Republican.

    Shall I continue?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Move on and forward and suggest and support what will get Democrats elected.

    Ending the far-left purity test. What works in Portland doesn't necessarily work in Birmingham.

    Actually voting instead of watching Dancing With the Stars. Vote in local elections. Vote in state elections. And vote in Federal elections. If someone doesn't vote then they have zero right to complain about a damn thing. Forty percent of eligible voters don't vote in Presidential elections and that percent gets exponentially bigger for local, state, and midterm elections. If we want better representation then we have to get off our lazy asses and vote.

    Recognizing that voting for a 3rd Party candidate in Federal elections is literally throwing your vote away. (Thanks, Jill Stein voters. You really showed us moderate democrats who's boss, huh?!)

    Understanding that politicians are human beings; not Gods to be worshiped.

    Brushing up on civics. The total collapse of understanding how our Constitution functions is a great threat to our country and gives us Neanderthals like Donald.

    Accepting that if your preferred candidate doesn't win their primary the person who beat them would be thousands of times better than a far right-wing Republican.

    Shall I continue?

    Jared, your statement ".........politicians are "humans"; not Gods to be worshiped" Implies that you forgot the "evangelicals" who, still "believe" an "god" sent the "baby asshole" to this planet. Understanding the Constitution does not help either, if the same "baby" can break all the rules/laws without that anyone can do something about it. Sorry any Constitution should be written such way that an "interpretation" is not needed. But if you write something in 1800 and make it so difficult to amend it or update it, ( I wrote many times what is wrong in this antique piece of paper), then you get the situation we are in now. Thus "sticking like glue to it, is naive. By not going with the "times" (by not making it a "living" document) then you create an self inflicted wound ( Case laws are only "bandaids", nothing else)

    Thus your statement of understanding how our Constitution functions does not help ever, if this document is lacking all the important "laws" or incomplete statements etc. For instance: "If there is no longer an "militia" here, that does not mean everyone can own a gun". Sorry it is an outdated document which gets us into trouble over and over again. How did all the billions of "money" get into elections? No laws at all about that in this document. NAIVE is the word.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch, Good times, laws, conditions are not a function of the Constitution. It is the attitude and conscious of the people that makes the conditions of a country. The hero of WWII was the USA. That created a peace bonus that let the Republicans make power and money thief agenda. Democrats used the peace bonus for everything except promoting the welfare of the lower class. They let the Republicans create a financial system based on the hoarding of money and stripping the lower classes of the opportunity to earn a living wage.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Dutch, Good times, laws, conditions are not a function of the Constitution. It is the attitude and conscious of the people that makes the conditions of a country. The hero of WWII was the USA. That created a peace bonus that let the Republicans make power and money thief agenda. Democrats used the peace bonus for everything except promoting the welfare of the lower class. They let the Republicans create a financial system based on the hoarding of money and stripping the lower classes of the opportunity to earn a living wage.

    Yes Chet; however if you read Jared's mails; then you get the impression the Constitution is holy, just like the "bible". Sorry to say "laws" are part of the Constitution; but in a lot of cases full of "holes", like the "second amendment", elections with the "electoral college" and nothing specified about the corrupt "billions spent to run an election"; no laws for Presidents; they can even "pardon" themselves (Trump thinks so). You are absolutely correct about what happened after WWII. Thus the "hoarding" of all that money, that is what you get if there are no rules or laws for the rich, but only for the middle class and the poor.

    The UN report stated that 14% (= 50 million) of the people here live in the worst (very poor) conditions you can imagine, while the rich don't even know how on what to spent their money. The biggest yacht, or fastest plane is not good enough, ask the Koch Brothers . That is what you get if only a certain "group" (GOP) is in love with Capitalism, without having a sound government system which cares for ALL the people.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Here is exactly how incrementalism moderate democrats elected Donald Trump:

    "Obamacare is like having a $5.00 coupon for a $3000.00 item"

    That is poor people subsidizing health care for better off people. The government is responsible for making people poor because over the years laws have been changed, repealed and created to kill jobs while making it easier for Wall Street to make getting more money easier, faster and quicker. Drug technology has advanced to refining and creating more drugs that are priced inexorably out of the reach of poor people. Medicare co payments for some cancer drugs is over $200,000. Mostly people with expensive health insurance plans can afford those kinds of co-payments. Moderate Democrats overlook the poor people in favor of claiming victories for exclusive programs. Thank you moderate Democrats for electing Trump. Spending millions of dollars on sure win states and ignoring some states . Hillary spent 12.36 million dollars for each electoral vote in California.

    “I’ve never seen a campaign like this,” said Virgie Rollins, a Democratic National Committee member and longtime political hand in Michigan who described months of failed attempts to get attention to the collapse she was watching unfold in slow-motion among women and African-American millennials.

    politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hil...

    Bottom bottom line Clinton barely beat Obama's votes in 2016 while Trump out performed Romney. Hillary remained stagnant by not losing any votes to Trump but Trump increased his totals.

    Hillary lost WI to Obama's 2012 vote count by over 300,000.

    Final tally Trump out performed Romney by over 3 million votes and Hillary fell short of Obama by 76000. If Trump had Romney's vote count Hillary would be President. Trump gained over 3 million more votes than Romney.

    If Hillary had opened up the party to the middle class she would be President today. A moderate Democrat can't win while the lower classes suffer.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    Here is exactly how incrementalism moderate democrats elected Donald Trump:

    "Obamacare is like having a $5.00 coupon for a $3000.00 item"

    That is poor people subsidizing health care for better off people. The government is responsible for making people poor because over the years laws have been changed, repealed and created to kill jobs while making it easier for Wall Street to make getting more money easier, faster and quicker. Drug technology has advanced to refining and creating more drugs that are priced inexorably out of the reach of poor people. Medicare co payments for some cancer drugs is over $200,000. Mostly people with expensive health insurance plans can afford those kinds of co-payments. Moderate Democrats overlook the poor people in favor of claiming victories for exclusive programs. Thank you moderate Democrats for electing Trump. Spending millions of dollars on sure win states and ignoring some states . Hillary spent 12.36 million dollars for each electoral vote in California.

    “I’ve never seen a campaign like this,” said Virgie Rollins, a Democratic National Committee member and longtime political hand in Michigan who described months of failed attempts to get attention to the collapse she was watching unfold in slow-motion among women and African-American millennials.

    politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hil...

    Bottom bottom line Clinton barely beat Obama's votes in 2016 while Trump out performed Romney. Hillary remained stagnant by not losing any votes to Trump but Trump increased his totals.

    Hillary lost WI to Obama's 2012 vote count by over 300,000.

    Final tally Trump out performed Romney by over 3 million votes and Hillary fell short of Obama by 76000. If Trump had Romney's vote count Hillary would be President. Trump gained over 3 million more votes than Romney.

    If Hillary had opened up the party to the middle class she would be President today. A moderate Democrat can't win while the lower classes suffer.

    #1, just stop it.

    #2, I am hardly a moderate democrat, I'm about as hard left as one can get without being a left wing terrorist.

    #3, I didn't vote for Trump.

    #4, why don't you stop needling people who do not subscribe to your point/s of view, or your opinions.

    #5, we all know and partially understand the reasons behind Mrs. Clinton's losses, why do you need to keep whipping a dead horse? You keep bringing up old stats.

    #6, stop telling people that they're attacking you, because we are not.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    Here is exactly how incrementalism moderate democrats elected Donald Trump:

    "Obamacare is like having a $5.00 coupon for a $3000.00 item"

    That is poor people subsidizing health care for better off people. The government is responsible for making people poor because over the years laws have been changed, repealed and created to kill jobs while making it easier for Wall Street to make getting more money easier, faster and quicker. Drug technology has advanced to refining and creating more drugs that are priced inexorably out of the reach of poor people. Medicare co payments for some cancer drugs is over $200,000. Mostly people with expensive health insurance plans can afford those kinds of co-payments. Moderate Democrats overlook the poor people in favor of claiming victories for exclusive programs. Thank you moderate Democrats for electing Trump. Spending millions of dollars on sure win states and ignoring some states . Hillary spent 12.36 million dollars for each electoral vote in California.

    “I’ve never seen a campaign like this,” said Virgie Rollins, a Democratic National Committee member and longtime political hand in Michigan who described months of failed attempts to get attention to the collapse she was watching unfold in slow-motion among women and African-American millennials.

    politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hil...

    Bottom bottom line Clinton barely beat Obama's votes in 2016 while Trump out performed Romney. Hillary remained stagnant by not losing any votes to Trump but Trump increased his totals.

    Hillary lost WI to Obama's 2012 vote count by over 300,000.

    Final tally Trump out performed Romney by over 3 million votes and Hillary fell short of Obama by 76000. If Trump had Romney's vote count Hillary would be President. Trump gained over 3 million more votes than Romney.

    If Hillary had opened up the party to the middle class she would be President today. A moderate Democrat can't win while the lower classes suffer.

    #1, just stop it.

    #2, I am hardly a moderate democrat, I'm about as hard left as one can get without being a left wing terrorist.

    #3, I didn't vote for Trump.

    #4, why don't you stop needling people who do not subscribe to your point/s of view, or your opinions.

    #5, we all know and partially understand the reasons behind Mrs. Clinton's losses, why do you need to keep whipping a dead horse?""" You keep bringing up old stats.

    #6, stop telling people that they're attacking you, because we are not.

    Dockadams said: "why do you need to keep whipping a dead horse?" I am just responding to jaredsxtn's signature ending thanking "Bernie or busters". He continually ignores that Hillary lost to the worst candidate to ever run for office . Unless people like him accept the responsibility for Hillary's loss and move on to support progressive candidates nothing is going to change for the better. Besides that I don't think I have complained about people attacking me.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams, Please show me where I have complained about people attacking me.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Stay on topic and stop making it a personal battle.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    Here is exactly how incrementalism moderate democrats elected Donald Trump:

    "Obamacare is like having a $5.00 coupon for a $3000.00 item"

    Tell that to the millions of people who used to be told that their depression, hypertension, or cancer diagnoses prevented them from getting any type of medical care.

    Voter ignorance and apathy elected Donald. That and an outdated electoral system that allows someone who lost the popular vote by three million to actually "win."

    Image result for keep your government hands off my medicare

    The rest of your nonsensical post doesn't warrant a response.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    Here is exactly how incrementalism moderate democrats elected Donald Trump:

    "Obamacare is like having a $5.00 coupon for a $3000.00 item"

    Tell that to the millions of people who used to be told that their depression, hypertension, or cancer diagnoses prevented them from getting any type of medical care.

    Voter ignorance and apathy elected Donald. That and an outdated electoral system that allows someone who lost the popular vote by three million to actually "win."

    Image result for keep your government hands off my medicare

    The rest of your nonsensical post doesn't warrant a response.

    Yes Jared, you've got the picture!