I am a proud, lifelong Democrat

[Cary]

Last edited Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:42 AM - Edit history (1)

We are good. We are the party that brings prosperity with our sound economic policies. We are the party under whose policies the middle class thrives. We are the party with policies that conserve our environment. We are the party that uses our military prudently. We are the party that understands our Constitution.

I haven't seen Grover Norquist in awhile but managed to stomach him on CNBC this morning. He was pushing the same old "conservative" garbage. Our party is fit to govern. Republicans are not.

We have two great candidates for president and the Republicans have had none. This is reality. This election is critical.

[femmocrat]

1. K & R

Proud to be a life-long democrat!

[WheelWalker]

2. Proud to stand with you !

[Cryptoad]

3. Guilty of many things

but never of voting anything but Democratic!

[zentrum]

4. I am a

….proud FDR Democrat.

[Cary]

5. Who just has to find a way to interject something, right?

I like FDR too, but I live in the here and now. FDR died 71 years ago.

[liberalnarb]

8. His policies worked wonders for the country

reagan destroyed them.

[Cary]

10. No one is going to argue against that

"Conservatives" also use dog whistles. I have heard the "FDR Democrat" call sounded, among others. Do you own that? Or do you claim that you're not really trying to interject an insult?

Oh, and Democrats are forthright and honest, notwistanding certain exceptions (and one exception not being Hillary Clinton).

[liberalnarb]

13. I was praising his economic policies. How am I insulting anyone?

[Beartracks]

18. To some here, "FDR Democrat" is a "dog whistle"...

... for "Let's hate Hillary!"

================

[Cary]

19. Uh, not really.

You're insinuating that you have some kind of claim on FDR's legacy. You don't.

I have an undergraduate degree in economics which doesn't qualify me for all that much. However I can follow the economic debate both in theory and mathematically. The correct term is not "FDR Democrat." The correct term is "new neoclassical synthesis, salt water variety." I claim that. Think Professor Paul Krugman. I guess you might say it is Keynes' legacy. Keynes was brilliant and spoke to conditions in FDR's times, as well as the liquidity trap we're still emerging from.

If you can have a discussion at that level I won't accuse you of using dog whistles.

[liberalnarb]

34. I wasn't the one who said they were an FDR Democrat in the first place.

But, the poster wasn't claiming FDR's legacy as their own. They were saying they support his policies.

[Cary]

37. You carried on the discussion

And I corrected you in "saying they support his policies."

You can't negate the fact either that he was embroiled in WWII, which changed everything. As I said, if you're prepared to discuss New Neoclassical Synthesis, Salt Water Variety then you're actually saying something. If you just waive the FDR banner you're just sloganeering whether directly or by proxy with the OP.

Can you refute that? I doubt it.

[Hortensis]

56. FDR and his progressivism are OURS. In this forum

we get to be proud of what has worked well and take lessons for the future from the rest. WE OWN THE GUY AND THE TERM. If anyone uses that as a dogwhistle, or launching pad for attack, then that person can be banned.

Until then and otherwise, acceptance and open minds are in order. Hostility and aggression against the DP and its members and policies are what we are trying to leave behind. But not by knee-jerk dissension from those who are having trouble leaving it outside.

[Cary]

60. Yes, thank you Hortensis.

I like to think we are a model, going forward when we have nominee.

[modestybl]

43. FDR died 71 years ago, but his policies still live... for now...

The last thing we need is a Dem willing to "work with Repubs" to undermine them...

[zentrum]

48. So on...

…. a Democratic thread, FDR is the name that must not be uttered? Got it.

BTW--Social Security is 76 years old.
Unemployment Insurance--81 years old.
The GI Bill---72 years old.

Out dated dog whistles, all of 'em! Got it.

[Cary]

49. No one said that.

You're so desperate that you just have to twist my words? You can't help yourself? You have no discipline?

Have you ever seen me say one bad word about Bernie Sanders? No, you haven't and you never will. But his supporters are quite a different story.

[Hortensis]

57. This may not work. If far-left-wing, liberal and conservative

Democrats are just going to bring the same-old ideological arguments here about how corrupt the party and its people are or aren't there is no point.

We all know that the far left feels that the party needs to be gutted and taken over by them to save it because there's nothing worth saving now and it's too awful to allowed to continue. Conservatives of course are registered Democrat, but most of them despise or at best strongly disapprove of most or all liberal policies and will vote conservative. Some vote liberal or progressive on particular issues,however.

I want a forum for people who are mostly proud to belong to our nearly 225-year-old party - whether lib or con, Democrats who want to improve the party without destroying it, and who support largely liberal and progressive, but broad-ranging, strong-left-to-moderate-conservative policies entirely for, of, and by the people. Whose criticisms are caring and genuinely meant to be positive.

IMO, toxic interjections that stem from lack of sympathy with the party from anti-Democrats from any of the party's ideological groups should not be allowed -- even though they are registered Democrats.

[Hortensis]

59. I want to underline: Many Democrats are conservatives.

Any conservative Democrats who are fond and supportive of the party, in spite of its predominantly liberal ideology, belong here as much as any one else.

Notably, some conservatives still believe in pursuing progressive answers to big problems, whether it be battling local hunger through their church or malnutrition in our nation's children through the Democratic Party. I say still" because the Republican leadership has done everything it can to snuff out ("purge" using a word some are too fond of on GD-P) progressivism in the Republican Party.

Conservative progressivism was and is real, however, and true progressives of all stripes (except extremists who will not ally) are natural allies.

Please, no more insults to our fellow conservatives for being conservative. This forum is for supporters of the Democratic Party.

[JDPriestly]

66. I, too, am a proud FDR Democrat.

Born in 1943 before he died.

I have worked on a lot of campaigns in my life, but Bernie's campaign is the first campaign in which I feel that my candidate, Bernie, deserves to follow in the footsteps of FDR.

Obama was a great candidate in 2012, and I worked hard for his campaign, but I will do everything within my power to get Bernie elected this year.

For me, there is no other candidate.

[MisterP]

6. it's the spirit of Jimmy Carter and Tip O'Neil

needs a tad more fuel to the fire, tho

[Cary]

12. I don't get your point

[beastie boy]

15. In the spirit of Jimmy Carter and Tip O'Neil

let us also be careful not to piss on the fire we are adding fuel to. Doing both at the same time will get us nowhere.

[liberalnarb]

7. Go Democrats!

[Hortensis]

61. :) Go, Democrats!

[ananda]

9. One difference.

The Reeps like to break things and call it fixing them,
thus shirking any responsibility, even sometimes
blaming it on the Dems.

The Dems like to fix what Reeps break... if given the
chance.

At some point though, when Reeps have spent too long
a time in office, it will be too late to fix the planet.

[Hortensis]

62. Agree for sure in general. Interestingly,

though, it turns out a very significant number of Trumpsters are NOT supportive of the "smaller government" Kool-Aid the GOP's been serving the past 40 years.

It's too much to say they very actively oppose it, but they represent a major danger to the GOP's Great Plan to continue the transfer of wealth and power to a wiser, stabilizing ruling class, while eliminating our constraints on that class's activities.

[mcar]

11. Proud, lifelong Democrat here too

[dchill]

14. Yep, Grover's still around...

Turns out he doesn't fit through the bathtub drain. So, he's just laying there, all wet and scummy.

[Cary]

27. I will give them this:

They don't give up.

Which tells me that we can't give up either, or succumb to the same kind of radical purity testing as is killing Republicans.

[brush]

32. Yep! Once repugs realized that silly pledge that he thought up as a 12-year-old . . .

boy didn't have to be adhered to anymore, he's faded from the picture.

And good fu_king riddance.

[Silver_Witch]

16. Lifelong Voting Democrat

Time to take back our party and run candidates that can win. Run candidates that represent the people and not corporations!

[Cary]

20. Time to stop with vapid bumper sticker slogans and cults of personality

[Silver_Witch]

23. Sorry

Not exactly sure what you mean. I vote as I will in the primary for the candidate I think is the very vest candidate for OUR party! And that is WNO I will vote for June!

[Cary]

24. Maybe, but that's not what you said.

You said: "Time to take back our party and run candidates that can win. Run candidates that represent the people and not corporations!"

Take back "our party" from whom? "Can win?" Really? "Run candidates that represent the people and not corporations?" My Democratic candidates have represented me very well, thank you.

Talk about peeing on my boots and telling me it's raining.

[Silver_Witch]

54. Oh please...

No one is peeing on your boots except the DNC. We lost big in last cycle in the House and Senate simply because they Dem middle of the road candidates who would not even mention the ACA and who distanced themselves from the President.

My "democratic" representative is one that believes we need stronger patriot act rules and is also a corporatist. I write her and get banal responses show total disinteresrt in my viewpoint. Often talking as if I am a silly child for "not understanding".

So I am glad yours represents your viewpoint. Hell there are a lot of people on DU that think Hikllary Clinton will represent them and we are all Democrats, so clearly some have taken to the middle road and left the progressive part behind and are willing to settle for less.

I am not so willing and I support candidates (with money) who are progressive like Franklin, Warren, Genie and a few others.

[Cary]

55. Perfection isn't a rational expectation

We lost for the only reason we ever lose: people didn't vote. And d if you want more people to vote you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.

Stop disrespecting people who are putting themselves forward. If you think you can do better then stop talking and start doing.

[Silver_Witch]

64. As I have said TWICE

Run candidates that people want to vote for and you will find that people turn out to vote. Run candidates that are only interested in supporting the wealthy and give corporations more power and no one will come vote.

Quite simple.

[Hortensis]

63. SilverWitch, IMO we have two candidates who do not

over-represent business. Also IMO, no nation can do without business, whether it is incorporated or not incorporated. Business is a major facet of US. The people. One-time head of GE and Eisenhower's SecDef said, "...what was good for our country was good for General Motors and vice versa." Good, smart, businessman, and they're not all dead. We need more of them running our corporations.

I understand your anxiety about the tremendous power business has gained by infiltrating governments here and around the planet, BUT the answer is not to slay the business boogies but to restore our control and a proper balance between people and their government and the activities of their business.

Now, Louis Brandeis said, “We can either have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.” IMO, this is what we need to destroy. We absolutely do not need and should never have allowed the development of a megamillionaire and billionaire class, many of whom are now trying to usurp government of, by and for the people. We were incredibly stupid and irresponsible, but that just means we have to fix the problem we created through our negligence.

THIS is a job for Super Party. But guess what? Our grandparents did it before.

[Silver_Witch]

65. Hortensis

I agree that we can blend corporations and people and we the people can have control again. I don't believe that we have two candidates that are the same.

Your post is wonderful. I am sorry that I can not see Hillary as someone who would fight for us. Perhaps you know something I do not.

[JDPriestly]

68. If I may answer the question: "Take back 'our part' from whom?"

We need to take back our party from candidates so far to the right that voters who are on the left on many key issues won't vote for them.

We need to take back our party from candidates who run on the money of our employers who treat us badly in the workplace.

We need to take back our party from candidates who lose mid-term elections to Republicans over and over mostly because they do not inspire Democrats to go to the polls in those years between presidential elections.

We need to take back our party from candidates who think it is OK if millions of Americans can't afford to use their Obamacare because of the co-pays and that it is also OK if millions of Americans remain uninsured.

We need to take back our party from candidates who support trade agreements that impose arbitration courts on us, courts that allow corporations to challenge the compliance of our democratically determined laws with their autocratically imposed trade agreements.

We need to take back our party from candidates who support H1-B visas when there are still well qualified Americans who do not have jobs and could fill the positions held by H1-B holders.

I could go on and on.

For Bernie supporters, this election is not about slogans but about the issues. It's not about hero worship but about ending the political power of the plutocracy and becoming the democracy that our Founding Fathers planned for us.

Feel the Bern!

[JDPriestly]

67. Which candidate are you talking about?

And can you explain why you prefer the one or the other?

On what issues do you agree with one and disagree with the other?

Or ar they really all the same to you?

[Duval]

17. I stand with you.

I've voted only for Democrats since 1960!

[Cary]

21. We stand with each other.

[redstatebluegirl]

22. My husband and I are as well and proud of it.

I am so thankful that we have two qualified, dignified candidates who talk about the issues in an intelligent way. The Republican party is a mess, ours will recover from the issues between the supporters of the two candidates. It may not look like it right now but we will. Hopefully everyone will get together to defeat these fascist monsters this fall.

[Cary]

25. This is it. This is the point.

Not "Time to take back our party and run candidates that can win. Run candidates that represent the people and not corporations!" That is code. That is a dog whistle.

We have two qualified, dignified candidates and the Republicans are a mess. They are fascists.



I don't see why that's so difficult for some people. Vote blue no matter who.

[redstatebluegirl]

26. Amen Cary!

[brush]

33. On point. Take 'em to task, Cary.

I also vote blue no matter who.

[HawkMode]

42. You seem to be missing the point.

The pendulum swung to the right with the con job which was the conservative movement in the 80's. No different than when it swung to the left in the 1930's. The swing in the 30's was so wildly popular that FDR was elected four times! Republicans had to switch their party platform to stay relevant. Eisenhower said any party who tried to get rid of the New Deal would become a dead party....Fast forward to the 90's with the New Democrats(Clintonites). Dem's capitulated to the conservative(less government) ideology. So, what came from the 90's under The New Dems?

1) Nafta
2) Welfare Reform
3) Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994
4) Telecommunications Act of 1996
5) Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act(repealed Glass–Steagall Legislation)
6) Commodity Futures Modernization Act

Doesn't look like a very progressive agenda to me, in fact it looks like the NeoLiberal economic policies envisioned by the conservative movement.

We have two great candidates if Social issues are your only issues. Might i add that Hillary has been VERY late on a lot of these social issues.

We only have ONE candidate if all issues are important to you.

I'm ready to take back the Democratic party from the economic elite and i already voted for Bernie in FederalWay, WA last Saturday and i'll follow him all the way to the convention. If you don't like that, retreat to MSNBC and CNN because you'll find great comfort and an illusion of a narrative there. Keep in mind though, both of those news outlets employ Hillary's surrogates and Super Delegates. You're listening to the elite create an unrealistic narrative. Lap it up and get ready for the TPP.

[Cary]

45. You have a lot of nerve lecturing to me about "all issues are important to you."

"You're listening to the elite..." blah blah.

If you can't carry on a discussion without changing the subject to me, then I have nothing to say to you.

[stevenleser]

51. PLease reread the SOP of this group and the notice I pinned to the top of the group

This group is not for attacking Democrats.

Thanks

[JDPriestly]

69. Sorry. I forgot that this was the second Hillary group.

I thought it was a place to discuss all Democrats, not just one. Sorry.

[stevenleser]

70. That passive aggressiveness is not going to work. nt

[JDPriestly]

71. Sorry. I'm thoroughly ashamed. Please forgive.

[ieoeja]

47. One thing you definitely do not know is what a "dog whistle" is.

Nobody is "dog whistling" that a lot of Democratic politicians have joined Republicans in believing that the business of government is business, not people. They have been shouting it loudly for anyone to hear. You and I don't have to be a dog to hear that whistle.


"Vote blue no matter who," signs off the poster that replies condescendingly to "bumper sticker" posts?

[Cary]

50. You're in the Democrats Group

You're not supposed to push one Democrat over another.

[stevenleser]

52. Please see my #51 above. nt

[BlueMTexpat]

35. "Fascist monsters" indeed ...

whichever GOPer candidate we face! Spot on!

[MatthewStLouis]

28. Amen!

Whoever your favorite candidate is; at the end of the day we are the ones who want government to work for the people! Smart, fair, responsive government. GOP is the party of wack-a-dos and broken government, corporate welfare and a rigged system where law-makers sit on their hands while the rich do their looting. Don't forget it!

[leftofcool]

29. Proud to stand with you!

[jwirr]

30. As a lifelong Democrat who started voting for JFK I do not

agree. Our economic policies have failed us since 1980 when we started playing ball with the trickle down theory.

[Cary]

31. Who is "we," kimosabe?

The correct term is "supply-side economics" which is to economics what "creation science" is to science. "Supply-side economics" was foisted upon us by Republicans, not Democrats.

I certainly never endorsed the nonsense. I was an undergrad from 1978 to 1982 and I studied "supply-side economics." There is zero evidence of any policy ever affecting the supply curve in any meaningful way. The empirical evidence they point to, Kennedy's tax cuts, didn't work the way they claim. Their math doesn't work. There are no major economic schools that endorse "supply-side economics." They are flim flam, nothing more, and no Democrat has signed onto this nonsense to the best of my knowledge and belief.

But we still have a lot of low information Republicans and charlatans to contend with. Don't blame us for their scam. We're doing our best to counter it. We do still live in a Democracy and intelligence is not a prerequiste for voting, or even being a president or a member of Congress.

[BlueMTexpat]

36. You really don't agree with this?

We have two great candidates for president and the Republicans have had none. This is reality. This election is critical.

JFK would roll over in his grave at your words, methinks. I am proud to stand with Cary and all those who want to see a Democrat in the WH in 2016.

[Cary]

38. In fairness I did make a typo.

Typing on my phone, on the train.

[BlueMTexpat]

39. I thought that must have been

the case! I almost put a "sic" in there. But even with the typo, the meaning was clear.

[Cary]

40. My error, sorry, I corrected it though.

[BlueMTexpat]

41. I'll edit my post accordingly.

Have a great day!

[ffr]

44. K&R Let us come together to support whomever the Dem nominee is

Together we succeed and taking our country forward.

[DemonGoddess]

46. K&R!

Proud, lifelong VOTING Democrat, at ALL levels, not just national! EVERY ELECTION.

[treestar]

53. Same here pretty much

I never have and never will be a Republican.

[NastyRiffraff]

58. Absolutely K&R!

Lifelong Democrat, as was my father. My mom was a Hungarian immigrant (born in the U.S. so she was a citizen) who always voted Dem.

I have a confession: I did vote for one Republican, once. It was Connie Morella who was a MD Representative for many years. I never understood why she was a Republican; she often voted with Dems on progressive issues. When she lost to Chris Van Hollen, I met Chris and told him I didn't vote for him but I wished him well in Congress. He laughed and told me he didn't blame anyone who voted for Connie.

[Jerrymooney]

72. Ultimately, I'm sure I will stand with the nominee, but...

I've never wanted to like a candidate more with less success than I want to like Hillary. I love the idea of a woman president and creating inspiration that women can do anything. I would be even happier about this scenario, though, if it were Elizabeth Warren. Perhaps I've become nit picky about Hillary, but she seems too hawkish and too establishment for me. I've become fatigued with establishment politics. Ultimately, I would support her if she wins the nomination, but it's getting harder to say that.