What Will The Democrats' Platform Be In 2020?

[SunsetBengal]

(06-14-2019, 09:11 PM)Dill Wrote: Seems to me like scale should work in favor of the large countries, with more people paying in. Why would we expect US health care to cost more because it is bigger, especially when there are so many other factors to explain why we pay double per capita per year what Germans pay?



So what about Germany, and Japan too?  They are WAY bigger than runty little Austria.  

If one of those countries proved to have a better, and cheaper, healthcare system--measured in something other than profits for doctors, hospitals and insurance--would you give that system a second look?

You already read my answer, in the post you quoted.  I want to see an entire US State try it, and see if it works, in the US.  If they can prove it overwhelmingly successful for 20 years, without huge breakdowns or serous backlash, then sure I would vote for it at the Federal level.  

[*Nately120*]

Less freedom and more taxes....vote Demorcrat OR Republican in 2020! Protect the precious status quo!

[Benton]

(06-14-2019, 10:18 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: .

Another political maneuver they need to make is to drop the whole gun control thing. It alienates a lot of voters from the party that could otherwise lean their way. There are so many hunters out there that are in favor of conservation efforts, recognize the effects of global warming, would favor progressive policies in other ways, but are scared shitless of Democrats because of gun control. There are other reasons I could go into about why they need to drop it, but I'm just focusing on the political for right now.

I think if the fundraiser Dems started tossing out 30 round mags, that would be the end of the republican party .

Well, it would be a big hit.

Of course, that's kind of jaded by my area. Kentucky mostly elects dems at the local level, but, because of the gun control issue, goes republican at the federal level. So many blue collared workers I know shot themselves in the foot with right to work legislation because they were afraid Democrats we're taking their guns. Which, at the state level, is crazy.

[*bfine32*]

(06-14-2019, 11:39 PM)Benton Wrote: I think if the fundraiser Dems started tossing out 30 round mags, that would be the end of the republican party .

Well, it would be a big hit.

Of course, that's kind of jaded by my area. Kentucky mostly elects dems at the local level, but, because of the gun control issue, goes republican at the federal level. So many blue collared workers I know shot themselves in the foot with right to work legislation because they were afraid Democrats we're taking their guns. Which, at the state level, is crazy.

Is your position Kentucky's economy is suffering?  

[Benton]

(06-14-2019, 11:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Is your position Kentucky's economy is suffering?  

It has been and continues to trail the national average in a lot of areas. It's still too early to tell, but if it follows the trend of many right to work states, the average wage will go down as employment goes up.

We were one of the few states on the right side of exports, but that was largely from cars and soybeans. I'm in favor of tariffs, but they will likely negate that positive. 

[*bfine32*]

(06-15-2019, 12:20 AM)Benton Wrote: It has been and continues to trail the national average in a lot of areas. It's still too early to tell, but if it follows the trend of many right to work states, the average wage will go down as employment goes up.

We were one of the few states on the right side of exports, but that was largely from cars and soybeans. I'm in favor of tariffs, but they will likely negate that positive. 

So that's a yes?

[Belsnickel]

Well, Trump may be making it easier for Democrats than we realize.

In an exclusive interview with @GStephanopoulos, Pres. Trump says health care will be a primary focus in his reelection campaign.

“We already have the concept of the plan,” which he says will be announced “in about two months, maybe less.” https://t.co/127YamkMik pic.twitter.com/oe9flzWwAe

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) June 17, 2019

[GMDino]

(06-18-2019, 11:35 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, Trump may be making it easier for Democrats than we realize.

In an exclusive interview with @GStephanopoulos, Pres. Trump says health care will be a primary focus in his reelection campaign.

“We already have the concept of the plan,” which he says will be announced “in about two months, maybe less.” https://t.co/127YamkMik pic.twitter.com/oe9flzWwAe

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) June 17, 2019

Same interview where he said he hopes the Democrats get his financial statement (it's beautiful)...but he won't give it to them.  

[fredtoast]

(06-15-2019, 01:00 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So that's a yes?

Simple answers are for simple minds.

Most answers are more complicated than just "yes" or "no".

It is funny to see you struggle with that concept.

[*Nately120*]

(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 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?

Wow, based on all this I'm starting to think Trump in 2020 will be as much of a shoe-in victory as Hillary in 2016!

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-14-2019, 10:18 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: They can do both if they're smart. Democrats are terrible at running for office, though, so who knows. Like I said in my first post, talking about how things haven't changed and, in the case of healthcare, have gotten worse in some ways is important. Talking about Trump ignoring the voters he courted to line his own pockets is a natural way to tie the corruption and the healthcare issue together.

Those social issues are the most important things to talk about, though. They are things that help all people.

Another political maneuver they need to make is to drop the whole gun control thing. It alienates a lot of voters from the party that could otherwise lean their way. There are so many hunters out there that are in favor of conservation efforts, recognize the effects of global warming, would favor progressive policies in other ways, but are scared shitless of Democrats because of gun control. There are other reasons I could go into about why they need to drop it, but I'm just focusing on the political for right now.

You'll rarely find people more wanting to preserve nature than those who go out, appreciate it, and put food on their table from it. They're also an enormous source of money for conservation efforts, and help keep the deer population from exploding out of control, causing massive swaths of plant life from being stripped clean leading to a massive die off in the winter from starvation.

Heck, the biggest outdoorsman/hunter President we've ever had was Theodore Roosevelt, and he created national parks, tons of forest reserves, fish and game reserves, and the Forest Service.

I think the problem is that Democrats have pretty much had the vegetarians, vegans, and PETA folk (and other organizations like them) pretty solidly on their side. Good luck explaining to a vegan PETA person that you're killing a deer (and eating it) to help conserve wildlife. (Meat is murder!  ) So the effort might be trading less (but guaranteed) voters for more (but not guaranteed) voters.

[Belsnickel]

(06-19-2019, 08:53 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: You'll rarely find people more wanting to preserve nature than those who go out, appreciate it, and put food on their table from it. They're also an enormous source of money for conservation efforts, and help keep the deer population from exploding out of control, causing massive swaths of plant life from being stripped clean leading to a massive die off in the winter from starvation.

Heck, the biggest outdoorsman/hunter President we've ever had was Theodore Roosevelt, and he created national parks, tons of forest reserves, fish and game reserves, and the Forest Service.

I think the problem is that Democrats have pretty much had the vegetarians, vegans, and PETA folk (and other organizations like them) pretty solidly on their side. Good luck explaining to a vegan PETA person that you're killing a deer (and eating it) to help conserve wildlife. (Meat is murder!  ) So the effort might be trading less (but guaranteed) voters for more (but not guaranteed) voters.

Oh, I've had those conversations.

I've convinced as few as two, possibly as many as six, people that previously abhorred hunting and (hook and line) fishing that they were ethical and humane ways of including animal protein into your diet. These are conversations I have on the regular, but I also talk about conservation of land, water, and wildlife a lot more than most.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-19-2019, 09:16 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Oh, I've had those conversations.

I've convinced as few as two, possibly as many as six, people that previously abhorred hunting and (hook and line) fishing that they were ethical and humane ways of including animal protein into your diet. These are conversations I have on the regular, but I also talk about conservation of land, water, and wildlife a lot more than most.

Continuing on the topic of Democrats needing to slightly adjust their platforms for a wider support base, I saw where one of the candidates said they would have rejoining the Paris Climate Accord in their 100 day plan. That's kind of a non-starters for me. Don't get me wrong, I actually LIKED the goals/ideas in the Paris Climate Accord. I just didn't want the US to join the accord because it meant sending $3b of our money to other countries for a non-binding accord. 

Why give $3b to other countries (which in reality means giving like $700m to other countries and $2.3b to the bank accounts of other countries's leadership and their friends/family/business partners) when we could just spend that exact same money on our own country and make it a cleaner and nicer place?

Joining the Accord is a $3b non-binding gesture, and that's just a silly waste of money.

Take that $3b, and use it to fund a program for having non-violent people in jail volunteer to get supervised highway and beach litter clean-up in exchange for tiny amounts of pay and/or good behavior sentence considerations.