Many Americans Say the Democratic Party Does Not Share Their Priorities

  • Thread starter Thread starter altmin
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 589
  • Views: 9K
  • Politics 
Paine said:
newrepublic.com

Democrats Must Become the Workers’ Party Again

Reconnecting the Democratic Party to the working class is an electoral and a moral imperative, and it will be my mission for the rest of my life.
newrepublic.com newrepublic.com

From Sherrod Brown.
Click to expand...
No.

If you want to say that Democrats need to do a better job selling the fact they are the worker’s party, then I’d agree wholeheartedly. I’d even agree that we need to spend more time in the rural and red districts to make this pitch.

But compare the two parties and tell me which party is more pro-worker. It’s not even close.

Just putting this out there…do you think some of these voters maybe lean into the “worker party” concerns to cover up other reasons for voting for the anti-union, pro-management party that the Republicans clearly are?
 
Paine said:
newrepublic.com

Democrats Must Become the Workers’ Party Again

Reconnecting the Democratic Party to the working class is an electoral and a moral imperative, and it will be my mission for the rest of my life.
newrepublic.com newrepublic.com

From Sherrod Brown.
Click to expand...
I like Sherrod Brown. That was a pretty empty piece. I get it -- he's writing a short article; he's no longer a Senator so he doesn't have as much standing as he had; and Dems are still trying to find the answers.

What I took from that article is that Dems need to talk differently. Be less preachy. I'm not sure what else there is.

The wage/productivity concept just doesn't convey the information that many people think it does. One important reason that wages and productivity rose together was that workers didn't face much competition from technology. Technology could make an auto worker produce more, but you still needed the auto worker. Moreover, the technology itself created a skill -- namely, the experience with the machines, and workers weren't as replaceable.

Today, technology doesn't just aid workers; it replaces them. It will replace them more readily the higher the wage. And the people who run the tech are college educated. There's just no getting around that. It's not entirely and always true, but it's more true than not.

And can we make up for that with less-than-college training programs? Here's my experience: back when I was doing computer consulting, big companies had IT workforces trained at places like Chubb and IIT and DeVry. That created opportunities for me, because those people were terrible at what they did. They were basically incapable of solving any problem. At one point, they hired me an "assistant" who would help me build, and then take over when I left (I was more of a consultant). He was a Chubb guy. He was completely useless. Like, I would give him a project that I could do in an hour on Monday, and check in with him on Friday. It was usually a gigantic mess. He just didn't get it.

I would never hire from Chubb or DeVry or any of those places again. I mean, maybe I would now, because I would view my previous experience as stale, but had I stayed in tech and not gone to law school, that would have been my attitude.

The reason is that those places self-select in a bad way. Who goes to Chubb? Primarily it's people who want a tech career, but were not good enough students or smart enough to attend college. Sure, there were undoubtedly some who couldn't afford college, or who had dropped out for reasons and were trying to restart their careers . . . but from what I saw, the average Chubb grad is a C student in high school. And that just doesn't get it done in today's world. It's an A-student world.

I don't have any good ideas about what to do about these issues, if it's true that the working class a) wants jobs it can't do; and b) doesn't want to accept government assistance (except the kind they already get but don't consider).
 
ZenMode said:
Wisconsin Democratic governor proposes replacing 'mother' with 'inseminated person' in state law
Wisconsin budget proposal recommends changing 'paternity' to 'parentage,' and 'father' to 'parent' in certain parts of state law

www.foxnews.com

Wisconsin Democratic governor proposes replacing 'mother' with 'inseminated person' in state law

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers is taking heat for introducing a bill with several changes to gendered language, including using the term "inseminated person" instead of "mother."
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
Click to expand...
Seems like something republicans would like since that's all they see women as good for.
 
ZenMode said:

'New low': Longtime House Dem ripped for 'disgusting' questioning of Musk's loyalty to US as an immigrant​


Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, sparked a firestorm on social media over comments questioning DOGE chief Elon Musk’s allegiance to the U.S. given that he has been a citizen for "only" 22 years.

"Mr. Musk has just been here 22 years," Kaptur said outside the Capitol on Wednesday. "And he’s a citizen of three countries. I always ask myself the question, with the damage he’s doing here, when push comes to shove, which country is his loyalty to? South Africa? Canada? Or the United States? And he’s only been a citizen, I’ll say again, 22 years."

www.foxnews.com

'New low': Longtime House Dem ripped for 'disgusting' questioning of Musk's loyalty to US as an immigrant

Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, is facing heat on social media over comments made regarding DOGE chief Elon Musk's allegiance to the U.S. based on his immigration status.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
Click to expand...
He's only loyal to his own self interest.
 
aRe YoU gUyS oKaY?!?!

2021 called, it wants its social media schtick back.

the right are a bunch of fucking spares. and also giant assholes.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
I agree with you.

Bigots ARE NOT going to embrace the Democratic Party.

You are spot-on, my twice-banned bigot friend.
Click to expand...
And people like you, Hillary, Biden are why POS like Trump win. Calling Americans bigots for wanting a secure border and not buying into the stupidity of "well, a man CAN have kids" is just digging your hole deeper.

If Rs would have ran a quality candidate in 2024, the beating would have been significantly worse.
 
4thgenheel said:
well, you're a right winger and an unrepentant transphobe and homophobe, so you would believe all that nonsense.
Click to expand...
This is, again, where Dems like you lose the average American. Not buying into the stupidity of DEI, 50 genders, men playing in women's sports, men getting pregnant, etc is not being transphobic or homophobic. I want all Americans, regardless of what they think they are or who they want to fondle their junk, to have every political right. That is not what the Left is pushing.

They're pushing "You're either with us 100% or you're a bigot/xxxphobe."
 
ZenMode said:
stupidity of "well, a man CAN have kids" is just digging your hole deeper.
Click to expand...
Who says this? It's your side who goes to town on this stupidity. Our embrace of trans rights isn't to shove weird shit down your throat. It's because trans people are real people; they are hurting inside; and a caring society cares about all of its members, even the marginalized ones.

My wife's niece (was nephew) is trans. She's a good person. She's been caring of her family (having fathered children before transitioning), and she contributes to her community. My wife loves her. There's no reason to take out your frustrations on her or any other trans person simply for being trans.

It's your side that always brings up these exceedingly rare horror stories. Oh, no -- someone said in subcommittee testimony in response to a direct question that people who identify as male can have a fertile uterus! How will we ever survive? Oh no, a volleyball player somewhere was born a man and is a decent player in a weak conference in women's volleyball. How can we possible cope as a nation?

If you had an ounce of common sense, your response would be: who cares about these wedge issues that do not affect my life in the slightest?
 
ZenMode said:
This is, again, where Dems like you lose the average American. Not buying into the stupidity of DEI, 50 genders, men playing in women's sports, men getting pregnant, etc is not being transphobic or homophobic. I want all Americans, regardless of what they think they are or who they want to fondle their junk, to have every political right. That is not what the Left is pushing.

They're pushing "You're either with us 100% or you're a bigot/xxxphobe."
Click to expand...
i'm not even remotely a democrat.

gender dysphoria is real. trans people are real people who deserve the same rights and respect as everyone else.

if a trans man who still has the equipment necessary wants to get pregnant and have a baby, who the fuck are you to say that they aren't a pregnant man?

and i'm saying that you're a bigot/transphobe/homophobe because you are one, not because i think you have to be "100% with us" whoever the hell us even is.

i'm still very much on the fence about trans women in women's sports, for example. guess i'm not "with us" either. oopsie.
 
superrific said:
Who says this?
Click to expand...
Everyone who calls a trans man is an actual "man" is saying a man can get pregnant.
It's your side who goes to town on this stupidity. Our embrace of trans rights isn't to shove weird shit down your throat.
Click to expand...
You should read the responses to my post by other people here. I'm a bigot, homophobe and transphobe. Have I ever expressed a desire to deny anyone a political freedom? Nope. Would I ever? Nope. If THAT was the perception of Dems, your party wouldn't be losing to 6'4" piles of shit. But that isn't the position. The position, as I mentioned, is that you're either 100% in agreement or you're a bigot/xxxphobe.
It's because trans people are real people; they are hurting inside; and a caring society cares about all of its members, even the marginalized ones.
Click to expand...

Ok.

My wife's niece (was nephew) is trans. She's a good person. She's been caring of her family (having fathered children before transitioning), and she contributes to her community. My wife loves her. There's no reason to take out your frustrations on her or any other trans person simply for being trans.
Click to expand...
Straw man. Not supporting things like men playing in women's sports isn't "taking out frustrations". It's being educated about the physical differences between males and females.
It's your side that always brings up these exceedingly rare horror stories. Oh, no -- someone said in subcommittee testimony in response to a direct question that people who identify as male can have a fertile uterus! How will we ever survive? Oh no, a volleyball player somewhere was born a man and is a decent player in a weak conference in women's volleyball. How can we possible cope as a nation?
Click to expand...
Yes. One person is often portrayed as representating the entire party. It happens both ways.
If you had an ounce of common sense, your response would be: who cares about these wedge issues that do not affect my life in the slightest?
Click to expand...
I don't support DEI because I don't support discrimination. I don't support males in females sports because I believe women's sports exist for a reason. That reason was clear to the country until recently when about half went off the rails.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top