Democratic Primary Season 2020

[gwb72tii]

Definitely not looking forward to all the political speeches and gotcha politics.

So the Democrats running so far seem to be coordinated in favor of things like a "new green deal", free college, free healthcare, punitive tax rates, wealth redistribution etc.

Is it a winning platform?

[phillipj]

"Just because someone looks like you does not mean that they care about you."

That's about how I'd sum it up. Frankly, I wish we'd just hurry up and fill government positions with people from all the various marginalized identity groups so that everyone can see that changing the skin color and genital configuration of politicians changes exactly nothing. Maybe then people could start to focus on the institutional rot and corporate cronyism that seems to be the actual problem.

Hm. Well, we're definitely better represented as a whole when we have diversity of faces and background -- but, for sure, diversity sure doesn't cure corruption & corporate cronyism.

We need people to care about and call for a serious push on campaign finance reform, killing the Citizen's United decision, ending the revolving door between public and private office & correcting gerrymandering if we want things to ever really work.

[bmwman91]

To be realistic, though, it's been studied that women do generally speaking have increased compassion given a multitude of issues, especially issues that are specific to women. Hard for us to say, as we are all guys here.

That opinion piece really wasn't awesome enough to merit all our parsing, but a good thing it kinda gets at is: it's no longer good enough for someone to stand as some supposed figurehead for some race or gender group, but have a record & history of no action... or even worse, actions that have hurt these very people. Clinton was a good example of this.

"Just because someone looks like you does not mean that they care about you."

That's about how I'd sum it up. Frankly, I wish we'd just hurry up and fill government positions with people from all the various marginalized identity groups so that everyone can see that changing the skin color and genital configuration of politicians changes exactly nothing. Maybe then people could start to focus on the institutional rot and corporate cronyism that seems to be the actual problem.

[phillipj]

Tulsi Gabbard :heart:


It's been completely unsurprising how the establishment wing of the D party and their allies (NBC, New York Times, CNN, etc.) have been doing their very best to gun her down before she even gets started.

Reminds me of how they treat Bernie.

[phillipj]

I am 100% with you on that line in the article. I see no reason to expect more compassion from one gender than the other, and to do so seems to require one to adhere to very old notions of gender. There are a lot of things that today's leftists say that seem to come straight out of Victorian-era notions of women being an inferior sex.

To be realistic, though, it's been studied that women do generally speaking have increased compassion given a multitude of issues, especially issues that are specific to women. Hard for us to say, as we are all guys here.

That opinion piece really wasn't awesome enough to merit all our parsing, but a good thing it kinda gets at is: it's no longer good enough for someone to stand as some supposed figurehead for some race or gender group, but have a record & history of no action... or even worse, actions that have hurt these very people. Clinton was a good example of this.

[bmwman91]

Fair enough. The labels get hard to keep sorted out, and I guess labels are really not supposed to be relied on as heavily as they are anyway. So-called progressives don't seem to be terribly progressive in a lot of ways, or at least not when their stated goals are compared to their words and actions.

I have my issues with the right-leaning equivalent to them as well. In the enduring words of George Carlin, "now that I think about it, fuck everybody!"

[decay]

I am 100% with you on that line in the article. I see no reason to expect more compassion from one gender than the other, and to do so seems to require one to adhere to very old notions of gender. There are a lot of things that today's leftists say that seem to come straight out of Victorian-era notions of women being an inferior sex.

i think you're describing progressives (such as socialist democrats like Bernie and AOC) more than you are actual leftists (anarchists, communists).

[bmwman91]

I am 100% with you on that line in the article. I see no reason to expect more compassion from one gender than the other, and to do so seems to require one to adhere to very old notions of gender. There are a lot of things that today's leftists say that seem to come straight out of Victorian-era notions of women being an inferior sex.

[mbonder]

That author has some good points, but the message is muddled. In the first piece, he talks about racism, gender inequality, and bias but then makes statements like this one:

"I expect a woman to be more compassionate instead of rationalizing her misdeeds by saying we should cut her some slack because she is a woman."

Isn't the thought that a woman being more compassionate simply because she is a woman a biased stance which does nothing but perpetuate the bias that he is supposedly grandstanding against? Seems to undermine his own argument right out of the gate.

The second article about Booker fails to discuss the reasons why he supported banks and pharmaceuticals. It's one-sided, which I get is the point of the article from the authors point of view, but you guys that are commenting are adopting that stance without asking why Booker may have made those decisions.

I'm no fan of Bain Capital and Private Equity firms as I feel they have been the destruction of what was once a thriving US Manufacturing sector as well as other industries that have been bought up and sold off by those types of investment firms, but I do know that NJ has many Pharma companies within their borders. Politically, supporting Pharma is a smart move for Booker as it brings in millions of tax dollars to NJ, so although I want healthcare reform, in this case, prescription drug reform, I can't really fault him for trying to bring money into NJ.

[decay]

This is a good summary of my thoughts on what we can all expect in the fresh hell that is the years-long 2020 campaign season.

https://www.blackagendareport.com/when-politicians-use-marginalized-people-human-shields

Regarding Harris, this snippet says it all:
"...her race and gender will be wielded like a cudgel against anyone who dares to inspect her record..."

as someone whose friends circle largely consists of what most people here would consider "far left"; that community is definitely holding her to account on her voting record, especially with respect to law enforcement policy and how that resulted in a higher rate of incarceration for POC.

[phillipj]

^^ The same author of that piece writes a similarly styled one on Cory Booker, here

highlight for me:

Don’t let your anger & frustrations with the current idiot in the White House blind you into falling for Booker’s gambit. Call him and his fellow corporate bought and sold candidates out for their continued subservience to Wall Street. We must stop falling for rhetoric and the stage craft of politics, forget what they are saying and inspect their record and pick apart their policies.

[phillipj]

This is a good summary of my thoughts on what we can all expect in the fresh hell that is the years-long 2020 campaign season.

https://www.blackagendareport.com/when-politicians-use-marginalized-people-human-shields

Regarding Harris, this snippet says it all:
"...her race and gender will be wielded like a cudgel against anyone who dares to inspect her record..."

Thanks -- I definitely cheers/applaud that piece, although I believe the author's characterization in relation to President Obama deserves a lot more nuance.

But the analogy here of race and gender becoming both sword and shield is spot on. The same argument is possibly even better made with the ardent defenders of, let's say, Hillary Clinton -- crushing any legitimate questioning of policy history or positions that were decidedly anti-progressive just on the basis that she was a Woman and a 'leader' of the (supposedly**) left/progressive party.

[bmwman91]

This is a good summary of my thoughts on what we can all expect in the fresh hell that is the years-long 2020 campaign season.

https://www.blackagendareport.com/when-politicians-use-marginalized-people-human-shields

Regarding Harris, this snippet says it all:
"...her race and gender will be wielded like a cudgel against anyone who dares to inspect her record..."

[phillipj]

2016 wasn't lost because young people didn't vote for Hillary, it was lost because middle aged and retired people didn't vote for Hillary, and it was not surprising that these people happened to be based in areas that Hillary didn't put much effort into campaigning in (with the assumption that because Obama won those areas that Hillary would as well).

Did anyone here watch Fahrenheit 11/9? What did you think?


It's streaming right now, btw. The whole focus on Flint and the Flint Water Crisis was especially powerful. (Especially as it relates to above).

[mbonder]

Booker, officially joins the race