Fixing the The United States Democratic Party

[TheGreatBuzz]

13 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

I dunno, whenever politicians start agreeing, I start getting nervous.

To me, in a perfect world, the best bills would have 60% congressional support with half being the most conservative Dems and half being the most liberal GOP.  I'm a fan of middle of the road.

[Hersh]

26 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

To me, in a perfect world, the best bills would have 60% congressional support with half being the most conservative Dems and half being the most liberal GOP.  I'm a fan of middle of the road.

 

The problem is that something like “let’s ensure clean water and a good food supply” shouldn’t be a middle of the road only position. There are things that should get 90+ percent. 

[No Excuses]

31 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

To me, in a perfect world, the best bills would have 60% congressional support with half being the most conservative Dems and half being the most liberal GOP.  I'm a fan of middle of the road.

 

 

Every legislation should be dealt with on its own merits, rather than same abstract notion of a middle road. 

 

On some issues, there are clear right and wrongs, and a middle road makes little sense. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

27 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

The problem is that something like “let’s ensure clean water and a good food supply” shouldn’t be a middle of the road only position. There are things that should get 90+ percent. 

 

22 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

 

Every legislation should be dealt with on its own merits, rather than same abstract notion of a middle road. 

 

On some issues, there are clear right and wrongs, and a middle road makes little sense. 

Maybe I could have explained it better.  I more just meant that middle of the road with support from the non-fringes of the parties instead of only helping interests of the party in power.

[Kilmer17]

8 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

The problem is that something like “let’s ensure clean water and a good food supply” shouldn’t be a middle of the road only position. There are things that should get 90+ percent. 

Sure.  But the second part of that equation is at what cost?

 

I want clean water and good food.  But I’m not sure I’d pay 50 dollars a gas to get it (obvious exaggeration)

[Llevron]

2 hours ago, PokerPacker said:

I dunno, whenever politicians start agreeing, I start getting nervous.

 

Damn. I agree here too. 

[Hersh]

3 hours ago, Kilmer17 said:

Sure.  But the second part of that equation is at what cost?

 

I want clean water and good food.  But I’m not sure I’d pay 50 dollars a gas to get it (obvious exaggeration)

 

We have to make an infrastructure commitment and let technology and science work in other aspects. Infrastructure will always cost upfront but taking care of the water, food and the environment will save billions in the long run. 

We have some really dumb shortsighted policies.

[PeterMP]

Wrong thread.

[PeterMP]

3 hours ago, Kilmer17 said:

Sure.  But the second part of that equation is at what cost?

 

I want clean water and good food.  But I’m not sure I’d pay 50 dollars a gas to get it (obvious exaggeration)

 

I don't know of a case where there has been an environmental law that hasn't at least paid for itself in terms of human health affects and efficiency (less days of work lost due to illness).

 

Clean water isn't just about wanting it.  It actually saves money.

[twa]

what level of clean and good is the sticking point.

 

 

[Hersh]

24 minutes ago, twa said:

what level of clean and good is the sticking point.

 

 

 

Only to you. 

[twa]

2 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

Only to you. 

 

Obviously you are mistaken.

[Hersh]

2 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Obviously you are mistaken.

 

It was an exaggeration but you so often just want to muddy the waters with your comments I don't really take them seriously anymore. (pun intended) 

[twa]

29 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

It was an exaggeration but you so often just want to muddy the waters with your comments I don't really take them seriously anymore. (pun intended) 

 

OK, thanks for your contribution.

[TheGreatBuzz]

8 minutes ago, twa said:

 

OK, thanks for your contribution.

I mean, he isn't wrong......

[twa]

11 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I mean, he isn't wrong......

 

OK, thanks for your contribution.

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

11 minutes ago, twa said:

 

OK, thanks for your contribution.

 

Look at my posts in the last 24 hours.  It actually includes thoughts and points and stuff.  You should try that.  Make a point and back it up with.........thoughts and facts and stuff.

[twa]

1 hour ago, twa said:

what level of clean and good is the sticking point.

 

 

 

[AsburySkinsFan]

22 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Look at my posts in the last 24 hours.  It actually includes thoughts and points and stuff.  You should try that.  Make a point and back it up with.........thoughts and facts and stuff.

Oh I’m sorry have you and @twa actually met before? You might be confusing him with members who contribute to a discussion rather than a bot with a preprogrammed set of responses. At this point I doubt twa would even pass the Turing test.

[twa]

1 minute ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

Oh I’m sorry have you and @twa actually met before? You might be confusing him with members who contribute to a discussion rather than a bot with a preprogrammed set of responses. At this point I doubt twa would even pass the Turing test.

 

OK, thanks for your contribution.

 

[AsburySkinsFan]

2 minutes ago, twa said:

 

OK, thanks for your contribution.

 

Yup there it is, immediate failure of the Turing Test.

[twa]

Just now, AsburySkinsFan said:

Yup there it is, immediate failure of the Turing Test.

 

 

OK, thanks for your contribution.

[Kilmer17]

12 hours ago, PeterMP said:

 

I don't know of a case where there has been an environmental law that hasn't at least paid for itself in terms of human health affects and efficiency (less days of work lost due to illness).

 

Clean water isn't just about wanting it.  It actually saves money.

That's a tough sell.  Not that it's wrong, but it's like explaining to coal miners in KY that it's actually better for them to not be coal miners.  Sure it's easy to understand that from afar, but not if it's your life.

 

And I think that's a big problem the Dems face.  Selling their longterm visions in a mefirstandnow society. 

[@DCGoldPants]

31 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

That's a tough sell.  Not that it's wrong, but it's like explaining to coal miners in KY that it's actually better for them to not be coal miners.  Sure it's easy to understand that from afar, but not if it's your life.

 

And I think that's a big problem the Dems face.  Selling their longterm visions in a mefirstandnow society. 

 

There are more museum employees than coal miners in the US now. I think we need to stop acting like they are anything beyond the super vast minority with their museum in Kentucky running on SOLAR POWER. It's like the NRA thing. 5M paying members? Amazon Prime has 20 times that number.

 

Blows me away why this is so hard to put into a simple message. Here is a picture of dirty gross water, ground, air.....etc. Do you want this for yourself? For your kids? For your Grandkids? If you do, then vote for those guys. If you don't.....then don't vote for those guys. 

[Fresh8686]

7 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

That's a tough sell.  Not that it's wrong, but it's like explaining to coal miners in KY that it's actually better for them to not be coal miners.  Sure it's easy to understand that from afar, but not if it's your life.

 

And I think that's a big problem the Dems face.  Selling their longterm visions in a mefirstandnow society. 

That sounds like a society problem, just as much as a Dem problem. But, regardless the key would be having both a practical bridge/transition in place, for those negatively affected by choosing long-term positive policy and someone charismatic enough to create a shared vision people can feel and invest in (easier said than done).

I've been thinking over the past week, who will be the "clean-up" generation? If we keep punting **** down the road and not dealing with problems, who will be the generation that actually has to do something about it, before it's too late? Or will no one step up and will it be too late and human civilization become a dream that slowly fades into history?

Dreams are only made real because of the effort people put in to making them so. Love only exists if you treat people right, give people the space to feel what they feel, and nurture the feeling each and everyday once a connection is created. Martin Luther King's dream of being judged not for our inherent appearance or persuasion, but the content of our character only exists if enough people make the choice to see the people in front of them and get to know them, rather than just react on a basic surface level.

We have to be and do more to make our dreams real and then have even more dreams available to reach for. And on the flip-side, if we don't then the dreams die and what we have and take for granted dies and are no longer believed in, so they just become dreams again... this is the consequence to halting and reversing the momentum of progress and you can see it occurring today.

Kids are growing up less hopeful and more anxious then they ever have before. The American dream is in hospice and as a reaction you get people who cling to Trump, in a twistedly similar way to how they clung to Obama even though he's conning them the whole time.

I look at the Dem candidates and don't see anyone I can truly believe in, and that's a problem. Because the GOP won't be looking for those types, they'll be looking for more con-men and that's much easier to find.