patrick.net

Those are good ones. I’d add their stances on health care, taxation and then being advocates for equality of outcome to round out their socialist tendencies.

I'd like to add that the Republicans have done similar assholery such as the failed war on drugs incarcerating people sometimes needlessly. However with free speech and being treated as equal people can advocate for a change in such laws while they can live without smoking a joint at work place or in public places, but they cannot live with the thought/speech police surveilling every word they say and discriminating against them for what they cannot change. That is why I think the modern left is losing, their policies are far more dangerous and people have started realizing that.

Heraclitusstudent says

I'm wondering how naive you have to be to think the 2 parties were not together in the corporatism and the short term profits. Clinton loved free trade agreements. And Democrats never made 1 move against that trend.

I find this really amazing that some people still think Democrats stand for labor in this country.

It's shocking that somebody would say that the Clintons - who ran the Democratic Party from 1992 onwards and were the #1 Allies of Outsourcing, Free Trade, H1-B Visas, and never, ever any reciprocal Tariffs or trade retailiation for IP Threft - were somehow defenders of American Manufacturing and Labor.

The Media still parrots the failed Neoliberal Policies of unlimited outsourcing, unlimited immigration, H1Bs to the Maximum, and the benefits of offshoring $20/hr jobs in exchange for fewer $9-12/hr jobs warehousing and moving imported goods.

It wasn't until 2016 that Hillary distanced herself from any Trade Deal, and that's because the TPP was quite rightly outed as another big transfer of jobs abroad. But her criticism was so weak and vague "As it's written" - anybody with half a brain knew that once she was elected she'd announce some token change fit her criteria. In fact, TPP would have signed by April 2017, if she had won.

Okay, we have some examples.

Taxes. I'd say policy on taxes is irrelevant in the face of spending, unless you believe that deficits don't matter. Spending is what counts. Neither party is able to cut spending in a meaningful way.

Immigration. Putting aside the sabre rattling by the Rs, there is no significant difference in outcomes. In fact, Trump is deporting fewer than Obama.
https://www.economist.com/united-states/2017/12/14/donald-trump-is-deporting-fewer-people-than-barack-obama-did

Discrimination vs white males in the spirit of collectivism. I'll start off by saying I've been a victim of white male discrimination, over 20 years ago. Was not happy about it. But I'd like to know what policies either Bernie or Elizabeth have proposed that fit this description.

Health Care. Universal health care, single payer, whichever, is common throughout the world including many close US allies. Hard to call this radical collectivism. Maybe the US should invade the UK and Canada to stamp out the extremism of universal health care. Keep in mind, universal health care has significant benefits for employee mobility and minimizing lost days of productivity.

Equality of Outcome. Need a policy attached this. I've talked about the problem of D and R talking points in other threads. This sounds like an R talking point without substantiation.

mell says

they cannot live with the thought/speech police surveilling every word they say and discriminating against them

This is important. There are people on the left side of the political spectrum that want to silence reasonable debate. There are people on the right side of the political spectrum that want to use free speech for protect hate speech. Moderates on both sides need to come together to find a reasonable compromise. As long as the general public keeps accepting the extreme messaging by Ds and Rs of the 'other side', the reasonable compromise is impossible.

What? No interest in this thread now?