What's new

the democratic party, a real question.

Not that I can tell, one of the reason's Hillary lost was because she decided the working class vote wasn't worth going after all she needed was the kooks and crazys
 
Did you guys watch the Eric Weinstein interview posted here the other day? I hadn't really thought about it, but he mentioned that the democrats stopped championing for unions starting with Bill Clinton because it just wasn't working for them. Thinking back now, that makes sense.
 
Dems have a big hole in their support. They have all the poor people on government assistance because they give them handouts to keep their votes. Over the last 15 years they have all the rich elites and academics because even though they got rich off it, they support what they think is a great model of communism. And maybe they think they'll be in the ruling class of communism if they put party over everything else.

Dems lost patriots and middle/working class years ago. Obama really pushed them away. "You didn't build that! Government did! Your clinging bitterly to your guns and religion".

The Dems have called the middle class and working class every evil name under the sun.
 
Did you guys watch the Eric Weinstein interview posted here the other day? I hadn't really thought about it, but he mentioned that the democrats stopped championing for unions starting with Bill Clinton because it just wasn't working for them. Thinking back now, that makes sense.

the union and big government stuff is an interesting situation.

the unions exist and have a use in the Absence of big government, the things the union champions and charges people for ultimately turned into things that the government provides :laughing: anybody who wants unions and pensions and shit to actually be attractive again should be against big government and against mass heavy regulations. yet, those fools think they can pass their union duties on to the government to get their same benefits. of course it doesn't work, but now they've got millions of people trained and primed to fight for big government :laughing:

unions have themselves to blame for that.

dave Chappelle made a comment is one of his recent more talky skits "if conservatives would quit trying to get the government to do all the things for them, we could get real progress in this country" :homer:

well, it's the big government expansion people, liberal application of the federal government if you will, that want the government to do the things. in doing so, they destroy the role that charities, churches, community oragnizations and unions all hold.
 
Last edited:
the union and big government stuff is an interesting situation.

the unions exist and have a use in the Absence of big government, the things the union champions and charges people for ultimately turned into things that the government provides :laughing: anybody who wants unions and pensions and shit to actually be attractive again should be against big government and against mass heavy regulations. yet, those fools think they can pass their union duties on to the government to get their same benefits. of course it doesn't work, but now they've got millions of people trained and primed to fight for big government :laughing:

unions have themselves to blame for that.

dave Chappelle made a comment is one of his recent more talky skits "if conser

I agree with Reagan on this one - Unions for gov't employees is a conflict of interest and should not exist.
 
Dems have a big hole in their support. They have all the poor people on government assistance because they give them handouts to keep their votes. Over the last 15 years they have all the rich elites and academics because even though they got rich off it, they support what they think is a great model of communism. And maybe they think they'll be in the ruling class of communism if they put party over everything else.

Dems lost patriots and middle/working class years ago. Obama really pushed them away. "You didn't build that! Government did! Your clinging bitterly to your guns and religion".

The Dems have called the middle class and working class every evil name under the sun.

because they know that big government reduces social and economic mobility and affirms/fixes their place in the upper 1/4 of society. they've got theirs and use regulation to keep competition away
 
Did you guys watch the Eric Weinstein interview posted here the other day? I hadn't really thought about it, but he mentioned that the democrats stopped championing for unions starting with Bill Clinton because it just wasn't working for them. Thinking back now, that makes sense.

The big Unions are still in the fold, that's an absurd charge. The UAW, NEA, AFL-CIO, and the AFL-associated Unions are all 100% a Democrat voting machine.

I think what happened is the Democrats stopped DEVELOPING labor. That's because the Corps decided to move labor out of Union territory. I live in Michigan, so no explaining there. Boeing moved it's headquarters to Chicago and construction to the South to specifically escape the International Association of Machinists.

Bill Clinton also gave the first SotU address where he DIDN'T mention Farmers. Because industrialized Ag had eliminated many of the labor jobs over decades and Farmers by the 1990s had become a non-significant voting bloc on their own. A very big deal was made of that at the time.

So yeah things changed under the Clinton administration they had to. I wouldn't say the Democrats stopping 'championing unions' at all. At all. They have held on more fiercely than before.

What the Democrats did was hedge their bets against Globalism, which had gutted American Unions. So they signed on with big Globalizing forces as the wave of the future. Big Tech, foreign interests, internationalists like George Soros.

I'm not even sure what Soros is doing is all that 'bad' or unusual, really. He definitely funded Agitprop and agitation, but historically it's pretty mild what he did.

And Democrats are not promoting more Unions. I mean, I am very, very hesitant about those "This is what's going on" videos especially from someone like Beck. OTOH, crazy pundits like Beck also break a lot of new concepts, I just happen to disagree with this one because it's observably incorrect.
 
I have some very liberal long term friends.They are not stupid ...They honestly feel the Democrats will bring on an utopian society of equal treatment for everyone. Of course the equlity laws and trillions spent to end proverty has done nothing...Well, not nothing, some poor or minority individuals do use the help and improve themselves....
It's futile to argue with people who have strong beliefs that are different than your own....
 
I have some very liberal long term friends.They are not stupid ...They honestly feel the Democrats will bring on an utopian society of equal treatment for everyone. Of course the equlity laws and trillions spent to end proverty has done nothing...Well, not nothing, some poor or minority individuals do use the help and improve themselves....
It's futile to argue with people who have strong beliefs that are different than your own....

You’re wrong. If they believe dnc will create utopia, they ARE STUPID.
 
Liberals aren't about equal treatment, they're about equal outcomes, which takes unequal treatment to achieve.

They have finally started replacing "Equality" with "Equity" in their propaganda, but most people don't know the difference.
 
The big Unions are still in the fold, that's an absurd charge. The UAW, NEA, AFL-CIO, and the AFL-associated Unions are all 100% a Democrat voting machine.

I think what happened is the Democrats stopped DEVELOPING labor. That's because the Corps decided to move labor out of Union territory. I live in Michigan, so no explaining there. Boeing moved it's headquarters to Chicago and construction to the South to specifically escape the International Association of Machinists.

Bill Clinton also gave the first SotU address where he DIDN'T mention Farmers. Because industrialized Ag had eliminated many of the labor jobs over decades and Farmers by the 1990s had become a non-significant voting bloc on their own. A very big deal was made of that at the time.

So yeah things changed under the Clinton administration they had to. I wouldn't say the Democrats stopping 'championing unions' at all. At all. They have held on more fiercely than before.

What the Democrats did was hedge their bets against Globalism, which had gutted American Unions. So they signed on with big Globalizing forces as the wave of the future. Big Tech, foreign interests, internationalists like George Soros.

I'm not even sure what Soros is doing is all that 'bad' or unusual, really. He definitely funded Agitprop and agitation, but historically it's pretty mild what he did.

And Democrats are not promoting more Unions. I mean, I am very, very hesitant about those "This is what's going on" videos especially from someone like Beck. OTOH, crazy pundits like Beck also break a lot of new concepts, I just happen to disagree with this one because it's observably incorrect.

Research who soros is. He doesn’t have any ethics and is basically trying to further the third reich.
 
Liberals aren't about equal treatment, they're about equal outcomes, which takes unequal treatment to achieve.

Some animals are more equal than others
 
If it benefits working Americans, they are against it. Feelings and emotions are top issues for today's modern democrats
 
More and more, I've come to realize that the Democrat party doesn't actually stand for anything. They're only against "things". Most of those "things" represent freedoms and individuality, the very pillars that make this country great.

These next two years will be very interesting.
 
More and more, I've come to realize that the Democrat party doesn't actually stand for anything. They're only against "things". Most of those "things" represent freedoms and individuality, the very pillars that make this country great.

These next two years will be very interesting.

they stand for large centralized power and control.

that is why American Liberal is different from European Liberal/"classical liberal"

American liberal is all about liberal government. classic or european liberal is about liberty of the individual :laughing:
 
they stand for large centralized power and control.

that is why American Liberal is different from European Liberal/"classical liberal"

American liberal is all about liberal government. classic or european liberal is about liberty of the individual :laughing:



Yes, their answer is always more govt, but that never solves anything, as we all know. Kinda like the definition of insanity.
 
Democratic party long ago because more concerned with what restroom transgender).00056% of the population), illegals, and people dying of climate change were concerned with rather than the actual working people.

They have few followers other than those than have always followed them on abandoned ideals that know no better because thats what they always have done
 
IDK, here's a bucket of grapes. Some are are sour and some are sweet. Crush them under them under the same pressure that you are feeling and give it some time in a cool wooden barrel. I'll drink that after 4 years.
:flipoff2:
 
Affordable care act. Allowed their kids to be covered in insurance and claim them for another 7 years.

That's more about indoctrinating young adults than helping parents. Double plus good that it kicks the can down the road on a group of young adults who didn't have to seek employment during horrible economic times.
 
So two pages in and not one good thing yet for working class Americans. I guess a few idiots think it’s good to have adults treated as children. Me I like to see them stand on their own two feet.
 
Top Back Refresh