What Will The Democrats' Platform Be In 2020?

[BFritz21]

And do they have a prayer, if they even come together enough to find a capable candidate?

Trump's bringing manufacturing jobs back from other countries, the unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in a long time, 4 million jobs have been created since he was elected, unemployment among minorities is reaching record lows, 4.6 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps since Trump was elected, Trump signed in the largest package of tax cuts in history, women's unemployment rates have reached lows they haven't seen in over 50 years, and there's a lot more things he's done as POTUS.

So, my question is, what will platform will Democrats run on?

Will they just hope that all these millennials that ***** in these videos online about how they're oppressed will register to vote and the rest of the population will forget how good they have it?

Will they find one thing Trump has done, like giving states the right to ban abortion, and run with it and hope enough women vote against it without realizing that their own state banned it?

What issue or issues can the Democrats possibly hope to exploit to get a win in the 2020 election?

[Belsnickel]

(06-13-2019, 04:22 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: And do they have a prayer, if they even come together enough to find a capable candidate?

Trump's bringing manufacturing jobs back from other countries, the unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in a long time, 4 million jobs have been created since he was elected, unemployment among minorities is reaching record lows, 4.6 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps since Trump was elected, Trump signed in the largest package of tax cuts in history, women's unemployment rates have reached lows they haven't seen in over 50 years, and there's a lot more things he's done as POS.

So, my question is, what will platform will Democrats run on?

Will they just hope that all these millennials that ***** in these videos online about how they're oppressed will register to vote and the rest of the population will forget how good they have it?

Will they find one thing Trump has done, like giving states the right to ban abortion, and run with it and hope enough women vote against it without realizing that their own state banned it?

What issue or issues can the Democrats possibly hope to exploit to get a win in the 2020 election?

First I had to laugh, heartily, at the Freudian slip in bold. Which helped with digesting this Kool-Aid laden diatribe.

The decrease in unemployment is a meaningless figure because the trend was already in place before Trump even announced his candidacy. This is a long term trend, not something Trump is responsible for. The same can be said for the reduction in SNAP recipients as the trend line we are seeing for that hasn't really changed since 2010.

As for manufacturing jobs coming back, that may be true, but other jobs have abandoned our shores to avoid tariff issues. Focusing on those numbers is cherry-picking the data.

The tax cuts aren't popular outside of the die-hard base. Most Americans aren't too fond of them, and they have dug our country into even more debt as revenues have declined at the Treasury.

So, really, all of the things that Trump has to run on aren't that great. But Democrats aren't going to try to convince folks like you of this, because you aren't going to listen. They're going to focus on people who like to look at evidence, reason, and logic in order to make decisions. They will also need to energize their base, because they didn't turn them out in 2016. Clinton didn't excite the voters. Most important, though, is the narrative that people in the Rust Belt aren't better off right now than they were pre-Trump. He hasn't fulfilled his promises, all while being one of the most corrupt administrations in our history, using the office to line his own pockets and those of his friends. He ran on a populist message and then turned into the typical fat cat right away. That is the narrative to win back the Obama-Trump voters, the ones that felt abandoned by the Democratic party.

[*bfine32*]

Free Airport Bagels...


OK, I think they'll run on a "return to civility". As you say they cannot run on the quantitative things in our society like the National-Global economy, so they'll turn their attention to the qualitative things.

[*bfine32*]

(06-13-2019, 04:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: First I had to laugh, heartily, at the Freudian slip in bold. Which helped with digesting this Kool-Aid laden diatribe.

The decrease in unemployment is a meaningless figure because the trend was already in place before Trump even announced his candidacy. This is a long term trend, not something Trump is responsible for. The same can be said for the reduction in SNAP recipients as the trend line we are seeing for that hasn't really changed since 2010.

As for manufacturing jobs coming back, that may be true, but other jobs have abandoned our shores to avoid tariff issues. Focusing on those numbers is cherry-picking the data.

The tax cuts aren't popular outside of the die-hard base. Most Americans aren't too fond of them, and they have dug our country into even more debt as revenues have declined at the Treasury.

So, really, all of the things that Trump has to run on aren't that great. But Democrats aren't going to try to convince folks like you of this, because you aren't going to listen. They're going to focus on people who like to look at evidence, reason, and logic in order to make decisions. They will also need to energize their base, because they didn't turn them out in 2016. Clinton didn't excite the voters. Most important, though, is the narrative that people in the Rust Belt aren't better off right now than they were pre-Trump. He hasn't fulfilled his promises, all while being one of the most corrupt administrations in our history, using the office to line his own pockets and those of his friends. He ran on a populist message and then turned into the typical fat cat right away. That is the narrative to win back the Obama-Trump voters, the ones that felt abandoned by the Democratic party.

I think Matt answered their platform better than I every could.

Their platform will be discredit current POTUS and his supporters and really nothing of merit on what they can bring.

Thanks Matt for Leftist perspective.

[Belsnickel]

(06-13-2019, 05:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think Matt answered their platform better than I every could.

Their platform will be discredit current POTUS and his supporters and really nothing of merit on what they can bring.

Thanks Matt for Leftist perspective.

Well, voters don't want substance. Substance isn't what wins the presidency. The past three times when there was no incumbent running for the office, the person with more substance in their platform lost the election.

Also, the messaging for different groups will be different. The Democratic base will want more policies, but the ones that went Obama-Trump? They won't care.

[NATI BENGALS]

Probably a strong foundation of "we are not corrupt traitors."

Stuff like...

We won't sell out our country and give nukes to the country responsible for 9/11 to enrich our family.

We wont support evil dictators and sing there praises.

And little bits and pieces for people who dont like drama and the circus like...

We wont act like middle school bullies.

And we are not pathological liars.

Probably a dash of stuff like intelligence and morality. But not so much that it would scare off the deplorables.

[BmorePat87]

With over 20 candidates, there's plenty of platforms to read online right now to give you an idea of what the party platform might be. It's quite diverse in ideology, though common threads are present.

The lack of competency in the executive branch, stronger alliances, not pandering to dictators, action on climate change, not outsourcing nominating the judiciary to the Heritage Foundation, the expanding deficit, the wealthy tax breaks, cuts to programs that hurt average americans, actually having a plan on health care.

A portion of the population will always refuse to acknowledge the years of growth that Trump walked into and will insist that the economy was a shit storm at the end of January in 2017. Democrats need only reach out to the blue collar voters who went from Obama to Trump and ask them if they actually saw a change and if they're happy with less health care.

[fredtoast]

--Renewable energy will be a big issue. Our fossil fuel boom only exists because of fracking and that is causing a rash of earthquakes. Also the fossil fuel issue will continue to grow as weather becomes more and more extreme as the result of climate change.

--The health care issue is still unresolved. Republicans are dismantling the ACA but still have not proposed a realistic alternative.

--Despite the "greatest economy in history" our national deficit continues to grow. It is like a guy bragging about earning more money than ever while at the same time going farther and farther into debt. The tax cuts have failed at paying for themselves and the middle class are not seeing a big benefit. My #1 prediction for next year is another round of tax cuts during the campaign. Rubes fall for that trick every time.

[SunsetBengal]

Well, Bernie Sanders thinks that Americans would be "delighted" to pay more in taxes.

That should give a pretty good clue as to what his platform will be about..

[*bfine32*]

(06-13-2019, 08:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: --Renewable energy will be a big issue.  Our fossil fuel boom only exists because of fracking and that is causing a rash of earthquakes.  Also the fossil fuel issue will continue to grow as weather becomes more and more extreme as the result of climate change.

--The health care issue is still unresolved.  Republicans are dismantling the ACA but still have not proposed a realistic alternative.

--Despite the "greatest economy in history" our national deficit continues to grow.  It is like a guy bragging about earning more money than ever while at the same time going farther and farther into debt.  The tax cuts have failed at paying for themselves and the middle class are not seeing a big benefit.  My #1 prediction for next year is another round of tax cuts during the campaign.  Rubes fall for that trick every time.

Are you suggesting the Dems will run on a platform of "We're going to raise taxes equally among everyone"? Or will they try to pull in the rubes with we're going to lower your taxes? 

The rest of your points are valid and well stated, but the question is what will the Dems platform be, not what Conservative Rubes will fall for.  You guys just cannot help yourselves and most likely to your demise. the person you select won't be able to either.

[Belsnickel]

Healthcare has been brought up, and that will be a huge factor in 2020. States, including predominantly red states, are passing progressive healthcare legislation while national level Republicans are still talking about dismantling the ACA.

[*bfine32*]

(06-13-2019, 08:14 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, Bernie Sanders thinks that Americans would be "delighted" to pay more in taxes.  

That should give a pretty good clue as to what his platform will be about..

Bernie wants to tax the folks that are already paying far more than their equal share of taxes. It's just the "rubes" believe the rich are getting away without paying taxes. 

But I agree a huge part of his platform will be raise taxes on the rich. I'm all in on the candidate that proposes a flat tax.

[BmorePat87]

(06-13-2019, 08:14 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, Bernie Sanders thinks that Americans would be "delighted" to pay more in taxes.  

That should give a pretty good clue as to what his platform will be about..

If the tax increase to pay for the programs he referenced in that quote was less than the cost of college and less than what I pay for health care, I probably would be delighted. 

[Belsnickel]

(06-13-2019, 08:23 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: If the tax increase to pay for the programs he referenced in that quote was less than the cost of college and less than what I pay for health care, I probably would be delighted. 

The amount Americans have paid for Trump's tariffs, which nearly wipe out any tax cuts, would go a long way in helping to cover social programs. Instead, we have to bailout farmers because of the trade war the tariffs started...

[SunsetBengal]

(06-13-2019, 08:23 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: If the tax increase to pay for the programs he referenced in that quote was less than the cost of college and less than what I pay for health care, I probably would be delighted. 

You realize that people in nations with single payer health care systems aren't exactly thrilled with it, right?  Once health care professionals are limited in their earnings potential, and "assigned" a predetermined salary, the best and brightest up and comers in the field will simply take their services to free market systems.

[BmorePat87]

(06-13-2019, 08:34 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You realize that people in nations with single payer health care systems aren't exactly thrilled with it, right?  Once health care professionals are limited in their earnings potential, and "assigned" a predetermined salary, the best and brightest up and comers in the field will simply take their services to free market systems.

We don't need to have a single payer healthcare and many places use hybrid systems. But Canadians overwhelming support their system and medical professional are some of the top earners in Canada. 

But if we adopted a Medicare for whoever wants it system as Buttigieg suggests, I'd be delighted if my costs went down.

[*bfine32*]

(06-13-2019, 08:34 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You realize that people in nations with single payer health care systems aren't exactly thrilled with it, right?  Once health care professionals are limited in their earnings potential, and "assigned" a predetermined salary, the best and brightest up and comers in the field will simply take their services to free market systems.

None of that takes away from the point that "Healthcare for All" will be a big rallying cry of the Left in 2020. It's unfair for us to discuss it's shortcomings if the OP is simply to ask what the Left will run on.

I'd support Sander's or anyone else raising taxes if we did it flatly across the spectrum.  

[SunsetBengal]

(06-13-2019, 08:39 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: We don't need to have a single payer healthcare and many places use hybrid systems. But Canadians overwhelming support their system and medical professional are some of the top earners in Canada. 

But if we adopted a Medicare for whoever wants it system as Buttigieg suggests, I'd be delighted if my costs went down.

(06-13-2019, 08:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: None of that takes away from the point that "Healthcare for All" will be a big rallying cry of the Left in 2020. It's unfair for us to discuss it's shortcomings if the OP is simply to ask what the Left will run on.

I'd support Sander's or anyone else raising taxes if we did it flatly across the spectrum.  

Pat, I agree that everyone needs to be taken care of, without a doubt.  However, I also agree with bfine that the entire burden shouldn't be thrust upon the big earners.  If the overwhelming majority of citizens wants to go that route of free health care and free higher education, etc.  that's fine, just distribute the costs of those programs evenly, not just as an add on to the high earners.

Heck, just look at NYC as a prime example. They went to a "tax the rich" system, and now their bleeding rich people in droves. If we do that Nationally? The same will happen, only on a larger scale.

[Belsnickel]

(06-13-2019, 08:47 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Pat, I agree that everyone needs to be taken care of, without a doubt.  However, I also agree with bfine that the entire burden shouldn't be thrust upon the big earners.  If the overwhelming majority of citizens wants to go that route of free health care and free higher education, etc.  that's fine, just distribute the costs of those programs evenly, not just as an add on to the high earners.

Most single-payer systems I have seen would work very much like your Medicare tax already does, just in a higher amount. Essentially, replace your insurance premium with a tax amount. The payment for it wouldn't be progressively taxed.

[BmorePat87]

(06-13-2019, 08:47 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Pat, I agree that everyone needs to be taken care of, without a doubt.  However, I also agree with bfine that the entire burden shouldn't be thrust upon the big earners.  If the overwhelming majority of citizens wants to go that route of free health care and free higher education, etc.  that's fine, just distribute the costs of those programs evenly, not just as an add on to the high earners.

Heck, just look at NYC as a prime example.  They went to a "tax the rich" system, and now their bleeding rich people in droves.  If we do that Nationally?  The same will happen, only on a larger scale.

I'm not sure adopting a regressive flat tax would be beneficial, but where exactly would the wealthy go if we raised their effective tax rate to levels closer to their tax bracket?